New Zone 3 proposed rules

[PEATMOSS]

Just thought I'd throw out something we could both agree on. One of the drawbacks of moving up here is that I really miss the fine, high quality farm-country wrestling.

[smilee_54]

Does the dnr have a page of the proposed changes???

[PostFrontal]

I am in favor of the antler point restriction on deer. The one concern that I would like addressed is this: If the goal is to have more mature deer which goes in hand with the social aspect of trophy hunting, what affect will this have on the genetics of the deer if we are taking deer that are yearling and older deer with at least 4 points on 1 side, and let, for example, the spikes go? Zone 3 is known for the 10 and 12+ point genetics in deer. And I have seen this first hand. From the reading I have done about Texas and elsewhere that have done this over an extended period (I'm not saying I am a biologist) of time, those spikes can turn into large antlered deer at around age 4-5. But for the most part they are large 8 pointers.

I would believe the goal of the antler point restriction isn't to get older deer, but to improve the age structure of the heard to ultimately get bigger trophy bucks.

I would like to see what the biologists have to say about this. Because if this is the case, then the hunting public in zone 3 needs to be educated that it will improve the age structure of the heard at the loss of the possible genetic line of more points on the rack. If it isn't the case then great. Do the antler point restrictions.

[PEATMOSS]

I've maintained all along that you antler worshipers would be much better off over the long run attempting to persuede folks to your point of view instead of imposing the apr's. I think what you're likely to see is the 50% or so that don't agree with you taking the first 8-pointer they see, most of which will be yearlings and 2-yr olds with the best genetics of the herd.

In the short term, you'll probably see an increase in big bucks, but over time, I think you'll actually hurt the overall genetics of the herd by selectively harvesting out the better bucks.

[96trigger]

I do think from a biological standpoint, this could be an issue. However, the 4 or 5 year old scrub bucks, for lack of better word, do eventually become big deer with some gnarly racks if given enough time. We not only have the genetics in zone 3, we also have the nutrition. If this does happen, the worst case scenario is to go back to no APR, and try and reverse the process. I'm more concerned about the large 6 pointers that never get the 4th point on the side. Or the area that has a group of mature deer without brow tines. These deer could eventually get a free pass for life. It would be an adaptation so to speak enabling them to survive longer and breed more, passing on their genetic information for survival. Over a very, vary long period of time, it could be possible to have mature 6 pointers that would never meet the criteria. However, I think this chance is a slim one. The deer population is just too large in this area for something of that scale to take place.

I think this has been noted in some states without the genetics, and without the nutrition that we have down here.

[james_walleye]

Peat you can't tell anything genetically in a 1 1/2 year old deer. A yearling that has an 8 point rack might have inferior genetics to the forkhorn on the same farm. There are many factors that play into what a yearling has for a rack and genetics is down the list. I'll just ask you guys this questions, how many 18" 6 pointers have you seen in SE MN? You just don't see it for the most part. This isnt Maryland or Mississippi where half the 4 year old bucks are forkhorns or 6 pointers.

There is a difference between QDM and trophy management as well. What people in SE MN are looking for is QDM in which you get bucks past their first year and you manage the deer numbers to get them to their optimum levels for the land to support. This isnt trophy management where you don't shoot a deer until hes 4 years old and you cull the doe population until you have a 1:1 buck/doe ratio. Its simply getting more bucks past their first rack. This isnt even about trying to get them to 3 years old. Its about getting them to 2 years old.

One other quick thing, in the latest surveys, only 18% of zone 3 hunters were strongly opposed to such things as antler restrictions.

[96trigger]

Hey james, I agree with you, it will take an aweful lot of scenarios for the genetics to deteriorate in SEMN because of this, but the potential, as small as it is, is still there. I have seen local pockets, where a dominant 6 pointer is running around and also a few areas where for some genetic reason, there are bucks missing brow tines. Is it likely that this evolution would happen? Absolutely not, but it is not impossible. I would like to add that in these areas, there are also plenty of nice bucks as well that are still doing plenty of breeding.

I am going to post the zone 3 link from the DNR HSOforum. It has a wealth of information as well as the surveys.

Zone 3 changes information page

[PEATMOSS]

Peat you can't tell anything genetically in a 1 1/2 year old deer. A yearling that has an 8 point rack might have inferior genetics to the forkhorn on the same farm. There are many factors that play into what a yearling has for a rack and genetics is down the list. I'll just ask you guys this questions, how many 18" 6 pointers have you seen in SE MN? You just don't see it for the most part. This isnt Maryland or Mississippi where half the 4 year old bucks are forkhorns or 6 pointers.

There is a difference between QDM and trophy management as well. What people in SE MN are looking for is QDM in which you get bucks past their first year and you manage the deer numbers to get them to their optimum levels for the land to support. This isnt trophy management where you don't shoot a deer until hes 4 years old and you cull the doe population until you have a 1:1 buck/doe ratio. Its simply getting more bucks past their first rack. This isnt even about trying to get them to 3 years old. Its about getting them to 2 years old.

One other quick thing, in the latest surveys, only 18% of zone 3 hunters were strongly opposed to such things as antler restrictions.

I'm no wildlife biologist(but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once)....I wish you guys down there well with this, as it looks like it's probably gonna happen. I really don't want to start knocking heads with you good folks over what you're doing down in your neighborhood as I feel like I've more than had my say in this whole matter.

The concern I raised over harming the gene pool is something that I think will literally take decades to manifest itself. I doubt you will see any adverse effects even at the 10 yr mark. However, common sence and 9th grade math tell me that if you have any "inferior" bucks in your population and you protect them over a long period of time, eventually they will make up a larger and larger portion of the breeding gene pool.

The mentality in your area of the state seems to be moving in the direction you guys would prefer, so I've always maintained that education and perseusion would probably be your best course of action. Your impatience may actually be counterproductive in the long run. You have a magnificent resource down there. I hope you don't wreck it.

[james_walleye]

Well you can also look at it like this, how many genetically superior bucks will be saved in year 1, get smarter in year 2, and be around in year 3 or 4 to do a whole lot of breeding that they normally wouldnt have gotten to do. So just as the random genetically inferior buck might get a free pass, so will a whole load of superior bucks that normally get shot before they see 2 years old.

[honker23]

JW-My thoughts exactly.

I think there are fewer "genetically inferior" bucks in the herd than people think.

[PEATMOSS]

I hope you guys are right, but for me, the math just doesn't look good in the long term. Anytime one has a population of any living thing and you only harvest those with desirable traits out and you never harvest out those with undesirable traits, eventually, your gene pool will have an abundance of those with undesirable traits. It's not rocket science, just good old eighth grade biology.

Like I said though, it'll likely take decades for this to manifest itself and I hope somehow I'm wrong.

[james_walleye]

Peat your going under the misconception that 8 point yearlings have better genetics than 4 pointers and 6 pointers and that just is not the case. If you put a yearling 4 pointer next to a yearling 8 pointer, it is just as likely that the 4 pointer has boone and crocket genes and might be a perfect 6X6 as the 8 pointer does. So MN would not be targeting a population of living things with desirable traits leaving the inferior genes to breed. There is no way to tell at 1 1/2 years of age if the 4, or 6, or 8 pointer has the superior genetics. The only way to tell is to get them past that point.

The reality is that you don't know genetically what you have until you get these deer past 1 1/2 year old and in most cases past 2 1/2 years old. That is why i say this: sure you might get a genetically inferior buck that gets a free pass, but all those yearling 4 and 6 pointers which have just as good of genes as your yearling 8 pointers and possibly even better genes now get a free pass and they now as 2 year olds and alot of them beyond that will now get to breed as well. You get a very few inferior bucks that make it further, and one heck of a lot more superior bucks not getting shot with further chances to breed.

Lets not forget either that does are 50% of the equation and that if you have one of the very few genetically poor bucks breeding its almost a guarantee that hes breeding a doe with superior genetics.

[james_walleye]

I called a friend of mine who is more well versed in these kinds of issues. I told him that "people have concerns over gene grading, can you tell me a little more on the subject". He has worked with the Lou and the DNR on a few subjects reguarding our deer herd and deer seasons. Here is part of his response.

" There are lots of ways to explain it but a very basic way to put it is this...Minnesota has produced some of the biggest bucks ever- Minnesota Monarch 334 BCscore=biggest wild non typ ever..even bigger than world record missouri buck at333 BC ...Breen buck 202 ten point considered by most collectors to be the biggest ten frame ever, Sal Ahrens buck even bigger at 208 typ but disqualified cuz a few non-typ points removed to up the typ score,knisely buck at 206..biggest 9 point ever, this years poached world record 8point...biggest ever...point is we've got world class genes here in our herd...any buck that lives to 3.5 yrs in this state is gonna be a dandy. Almost all 2.5 yr old bucks here are 8 pointers or better...MOST states outside the midwest can't claim that..we can. Bucks here have good genes, does here carry world class antler genes as well. Even if we could somehow make each years entire buck harvest ALL gentically gifted bucks...some will breed before they die and almost all of the bucks left over still also have excellent genes...and so do all the does they breed...our gene pool was created over hundreds of thousands of years..it is rock solid. You're not gonna change it by shooting "some" of the bucks and even fewer does each year. It's like Prego..."its in there". The other thing is ,just like in Missouri..after only ONE year with APR'sthe number of basket racked bucks in Minnesota will double...in Minnesota that's gonna mean a boatload of basket racked 8 pointers...and just like in Missouri we're gonna kill most of them at 2.5 yrs of age. (In other words instead of most of our harrvest being 1.5 yr olds we'll now just kill most of them one year later in their life as 2.5 basket racked 8 pointers.) Fact of the matter is, in that situation, there's no way in heck all the average hunters out there are gonna be able to identify and target the genetically gifted bucks in a herd full of basket racks when they are all at 2.5 yrs of age....we could maybe tell better if they all were 4.5 yrs of age but no way at 2.5. BOTTOM LINE: APR's are gonna let most bucks see their second yr of life and then most will die...that can't be any worse than killing most of them at 1.5 like we are now...any extra life gives them time to do what nature intended and that's a win for the deer herd period."

[PEATMOSS]

I'd really like to hear a REAL wildlife biologists' take on this instead of us amateurs kicking it back and forth.

JW, I'm not at all concerned about the deer that would be taken out of the system. My concern lies with the fact that there is in fact a very small portion of the herd, likely in the low single digits, that are genitic freaks that can't become an 8-point buck.

As it is now, these deer are harvested out of the system at the same rate as the others. Under APR, these deer will NEVER be harvested. Thus, they would make up a larger percentage of the breeding pool. This number would continue to rise as long as the undesirables are NEVER harvested out of the herd.

Do you not get what I'm saying or just disagree?

[james_walleye]

My friend works with the DNR and biologists, thats why i called him. Here is a little more of his response:

"One other thing on "genetic expression" ...Gene transfer is not a simple,cut and dried "appearance rules all" type of thing. EXAMPLE: You can take a man who is 5foot 9, 175 lbs and a woman who is5'3 135lbs...they have a son...who grows up to be 6'4 250 lbs ....why?,because on the fathers side was a grandpa who was a big guy and on themothers side there was a grandpa or grand mother who was a big person. Here you have two parents, who look entirely average, yet can produceoffspring with far different physical characteristics than their own becauseof "Backround genetics" from previous generations. This happens ALL THETIME. Same with deer......you could take an average 3.5 yr old 18 inch 140class 8 pointer who in his "backround" is carrying super BC genetics....hehappens to breed a doe who also has great antler genetics in her "backround"and guess what....these two average looking deer produce a buck fawn whoturns into a 30 inch, 212" BC buck 6 yrs later. It can work in a reversefashion as well. The point is this .... because hunters have no way of knowing what kindof very complex "backround genetics" are being carried in any deer theyshoot, male or female, and because hunters usually kill less than 50% of thetotal population each year....the possibility of being able to highgrade anydeer herd simply by "visually picking what to shoot" is extremely unlikelyif not impossible. Especially in wild, where freeroaming deer herds that have"world class" genetics in the first place like Minnesota does."

What im saying Peat is that your 140" 8 pointer might have the same "bad gene" as the mutant 6 pointer that will never be anything. The mutant 6 pointer might have B&C genes in his background on the converse. Your little forkhorn might have the superior genetics. Your basket 8 pointer that gets shot might be carrying the bad gene that in the next generation might produce the mutant 6 pointer you are worried about. You don't know what kind of genetics a 140" deer is carrying vs. the mutant 6 pointer. Heck its very possible that the mutant 6 pointer you are worried about has a better background than the 140" buck next to him. Its possible that the 140" that we like to see somehow has the horrible background and in actuality is the buck we don't want to be breeding. The point is we as hunters don't know. You can't tell, and I can't tell what the genetic background of any buck is. So ya i dont agree with you. It goes much deeper than "that mutant 6 pointer has bad genes and that big buck over there has good genes". Its not as cut and dried as the 6 pointers offspring will have bad genes and the big bucks offspring will have good genes. The 3 year old 6 pointer might produce more 140" bucks than the 140" thats breeding. The 140" 3 year old might produce more "mutants" than what the mutant itself will. We don't know the genetic background of individual freeroaming deer.

[PostFrontal]

Peat-I 100% agree with you that educating the neighbors about using this approach and socially buying into this should be the first step before any regulations are put in the place. In my humble opinion in the SE we have been doing that and are at the point now where the next step is to insitute it in the regulations. Instead of herd mangement, move the focus to age structure of the herd. I think one of the major differences down there is something like 95% of the land is private. Because of this most people have enough opportunity to pass on these deer and still put meat in the freezer. Maybe different up north. So it is a good place to try it before the rest of the state.

We (and the neighbors) have an unwritten rule of you only shoot a buck if you are going to put it on the wall but you can shoot any doe (1st time hunters and kids can shoot anything). Those that only want to go after the big rack and those that don't care about the rack and just want meat are both happy. We are all deer hunters, and I have never understood why we try to label others as an extreme and say that they are wrong because they want to do something different than us. I would submit that there is more common ground that we have than differences. And there is a way to do everything.

Example. I definitely am someone that goes after the big rack. But I also want deer in the freezer for myself and to give away to non-hunter friends. So I have 1 that is going on the wall and 2 does that are in the freezer from last year. My buddy's dad has shot so many deer over the years, he let's the monsters walk because he wants the "90 pounders" because they taste better. So although I love everything about big bucks that is not the only thing I shoot. I believe that is how most people are that go after big racks. They do both.

[PEATMOSS]

Nate, you are so right when you say that we, as hunters,have more in common than we have differences. I also really appreciate the respectful tone of your post. It appears as though you and your neighbors have worked things out well for youselves and your respective hunting parties. It is really apparent that most folks down in your area are moving in your direction.

My only real contention lies in the that despite the fact that hunters in your area seem to be voluntarily passing on small bucks in greater and greater numbers each year, there is still this drive to force those that haven't been persueded to comply by force of law.

You state in your post that "1st time hunters and kids can shoot anything". I am wondering 1- why would you voluntarily give this up? and 2-even if you are willing to take this step in your party, how do you justify forcing this on others that do not share your view?

[james_walleye]

Peat, the latest couple polls show that only 18% of hunters in zone 3 strongly oppose restrictions. They also show 58% are in favor. So cant this question be asked?: why should the majority of hunters in SE MN be forced to deal with deer restrictions, or in this case lack there of, that they don't agree with so the minority can be happy? We have seen positive results in other states and people down here are ready to see changes here. This isnt something that 20% of the hunters are trying to put on the rest of the 80%.

Im not trying to be argumentative or hostile, im just trying to point out the flip side. A flip side that im pointing out that is in the majority down here. I realize that this is not be a statewide sentiment. I have relatives that hunt out west that have a hunting party of 8 thats lucky to shoot 1 or 2 deer. I realize people in parts of the state like this won't agree with me, and myself wouldnt agree with APR's in places like this. Zone 3 is a different animal and the majority of people are looking for changes.

[PEATMOSS]

You've pretty much widdled it right down to the bare essentials of the difference between you and me JW.

I tend to believe in the rights of individual hunters to conduct themselves as they see fit, so long as they don't endanger or harm others or the resource.

It seems as though you believe in the right of the majority to dictate their beliefs to others. "Majority rules" is great, when you are in the majority, not so much the other way around. For instance, let's say our increasingly urbanized society decides someday that the only justifiable reason for hunting is to control the population. As such, only does could be harvested and those beautiful majestic bucks would be left for all to enjoy. Stil gonna be singing the same song?

[james_walleye]

Peat the only reason i bring the "majority rules" deal up is for years people down here , and on here for that matter, that wanted to see some kind of regulation put in to protect bucks were told "don't push your thoughts onto the majority". "Why should a restriction be put in for the vocal minority". "Stop this, the silent majority doesnt want this". I would try to explain my thoughts on why i wanted something done, and very rationally on here, and people would get hostile, "your the vocal minority, quit pushing this on people". And really the only reason the DNR for many years didnt act on any of this was because the majority didnt want anything done. Even though the DNR knew change was needed, they didnt because of what the majority wanted. And for years I was saying if the DNR knew something needed to be done for the deer herd, than do something for the deer herd, not for the majority. Its only in the very recent the definitive majority wants restrictions that now the DNR decided to move forward with this. Now the DNR knows something needs to change AND they have the people of zone 3 backing them. Zone 3 has things in place to try this out unlike other parts of the state. So when i bring up "the majority" on this, its very much pertinent to the subject knowing how it has come about.

I do enjoy your comments on this. You put some good thoughts together and i know outside of this area thoughts on this subject are different than down here. I've been a little closer to the subject than most with how close my friend works with the DNR on certain things. Its rather interesting some of the things he throws out at me about what is going on. Especially interesting was info he threw out at me about other states that have put in similiar regs. I'll admit at the very onset, i wasnt sure if APR's were the ticket. But after all the info hes given me to look at and hearing about other states results, i've come full circle.

[PostFrontal]

In general, the answer to both your questions is because of the number of deer down there.

Question #1: I feel it is all our responsibility to introduce and reintroduce kids and people to hunting in general that have never done it, or haven't done it in a long time. That includes without restriction. I feel this is more important than I shooting a trophy buck, or you putting meat in the freezer (my opinion). I'm sure I don't need to go deeper into that.

Question #2: Let's look at it from a different perspective.

The way the regulations are written now, the non-trophy (or non-QDM) hunters get to shoot anything which is actually deterimental to someone that wants the deer to grow older so they could shoot a big buck. If I did only shoot big bucks I am not infringing on the meat-hunters ability to shoot a deer. In fact, I am letting more deer walk that allows meat hunters more opportunity to fill their tag. Therefore, through the current regulations others views are actually being forced on those that want to hunt big bucks.

In theory I agree with you that any thought of more regulation when it comes to hunting is the last thing I would ever want.

If I think of it from a meat hunter perspective, I don't care if it is a deer that has a rack attached to it or not. That isn't important to me. What is important is that I get meat for the freezer. What my concerns with this new regulation is, is it going to inhibit my ability to take a deer and lessen my hunting experience. So what it comes down to is with then new regulation is there enough deer in zone 3 that I as a meat hunter can let these apr deer walk and still harvest some.

The answer in my experience in Zone 3 is yes. And not just on the private land. Put in some time at Whitewater and you will see what I mean.

I think the apr is a good common ground for everybody and actually does a better job of meeting what everyone wants out of their hunting experience than the current regulations.

[96trigger]

Well put guys, I think this part of the state is very different from the rest. Hence the zone 3 classification. I do think that many of the hunters are ready to move on. I think its hard for some to fathom a deer population where seeing multiple deer pre outing is very common. Seeing no deer per outing is more uncommon. This has been the norm for about the last 5-10 years.

I think that a large portion of the state is really scared of this simply due to the fact that they don't see the numbers that we do. They are also scared that if zone 3 is successful, it will go statewide. I'm sure that this doesn't sit well with them. Its the give an inch, take a mile theory.

James, I'm curious about who your friend is. I have been in contact with the DNR a couple of times on this. All I can say is how great they are in explaining their responses. Even volunteering information when I haven't asked for it. That really means a lot to me as a hunter.

I will not make it to the meeting in Rochester, but if you would post a report, that would be great. James, If you want to email me, my address is not hard to find, just go to the school HSOforum.

[Jameson]

...I think that a large portion of the state is really scared of this simply due to the fact that they don't see the numbers that we do....

Also, some parts of the state don't have the antlers that you do. It is common where I do the majority of my hunting for a 1.5 year old buck to be a 6 point with a single 1/4 inch brow tine. It is common for the 2.5 years old to be a 6 point with a single 3/4 inch brow tine. Watching the presentation is states that the 4 point restriction will protect 80% (or was it 90%?) of the 1.5's and 10% of the 2.5's in zone 3. That same restriction would protect 90% of bucks under 3.5 where I hunt.

[zepman]

I would have a very hard time with the APR's. I've shot 8 mature bucks in my life and I've never been able to tell how many points were on each side ever...it just happens too quickly. I've passed on countless baskets, spikes etc...and I mainly look for height/width and mass before I pull the trigger but never once have I been able to tell EXACTLY what just dropped 50-100yds out through the cover of woods/brush etc....Add low-light conditions and it just makes matters all the more confusing.

[james_walleye]

People in the states where they have been introduced sure have taken a liking to them.