No more party hunting in Zone 3, SE MN

[Big Dave2]

What about the hunters that start hunting in their 20's? Too bad for them, huh.

I sure wish they took all the youth regs and made them into 'new hunter' regs. Instead of youths receiving auto-doe tags in Lottery areas, anyone who has purchased less than four (or three) deer licenses would receive an auto-doe tag, etc..

I agree completly with this. Most people think that everyone starts deer hunting when they are 12 or 13, thats not so. I didn't start until I was 30.

[harvey lee]

I know its always been illegal, it's just that now with no party hunting, this illegal way of claiming you are legally hunting will theoretically be eliminated. Don't get me wrong. I'm not in favor of additional legislation or getting rid of party hunting, actually. I'm just thinking it's kind of ridiculous that people get so worked up that they'll have to shoot and tag their own deer on their own licenses. Seems kind of silly. You can still hunt and carry on all the traditions of deer camp and so on. The legal bag limit hasn't changed for everyone on the hunt if I'm not mistaken?

The sad thing is that the people who really want to shoot way more deer will just buy tags for their wives and mother-in-laws anyway. So regardless of party hunting being eliminated, the people who shot many deer over the limit before via party hunting (illegally), will do so now with a tag for grandma and their girlfriend.

The one who purchases a tag for his wife if party hunting is outlawed will still be breaking the law.

Its sad to think that our deer hunting has turned into who can shoot the most deer.

What's wrong with buying a license and shooting your own deer? Does one need to shot their buddies and everyone elses?

[Big Dave2]

What's wrong with buying a license and shooting your own deer? Does one need to shot their buddies and everyone elses?

I don't need to shoot anyone elses deer but someone definately needs to shoot mine! Have you seen me shoot?

[harvey lee]

I typically have extra deer ever year to give away. If I pull enough licenses for ND, you can have a deer.

Now you don't even need to shot, gut or cut up.

[Big Dave2]

Its sad to think that our deer hunting has turned into who can shoot the most deer.

[nonteepical]

What about the hunters that start hunting in their 20's? Too bad for them, huh.

I sure wish they took all the youth regs and made them into 'new hunter' regs. Instead of youths receiving auto-doe tags in Lottery areas, anyone who has purchased less than four (or three) deer licenses would receive an auto-doe tag, etc..

i would hope when they hit their 20"s they would be mature enough to understand how the herd is being managed, and not whine/mope, what about poor me i'm 25.

[lungdeflator]

Youth, middle age, old, man or women, when they start hunting they should all be treated like "new" hunters. "new" being they have never bought a hunting tag before (other state tags do count). let them all have special regs for a year or two and then treat them like a 30 year veteran. 2 years should be plenty for them to learn the basics of any QDM or other herd management practices, if they are interested.

[bottom-bouncer]

I am going to try shed some light on why this is a good thing and why it needs to be done this way. 1. the APR is for all seasons bow,gun and muzzy. Those 17yrs and younger are exempt from APR. 2.some asked what myles keller's views are on this I will ask him the next time I see him or will ask his son when I bump into him. But knowing him I would bet that he is in favor of this. 3. Why can Wisc and IA shoot the number of mature and or B.C bucks that they do while still allowing cross taging simple they dont gun hunt the rut! As for all of you who want to stop all methods of deer hunting during last two weeks of october into december. Really do you think that we bowhunters are really affecting the deer numbers? Give me a break. Those who think this way are ignorant as to how hard it is to shoot any deer with a bow let alone a mature buck. Some have complained about how hard if succesfull this could make getting onto private land. Guess what it already is Near impossible in this part of the state. Public land is already way overcrowded. Unless you live in this area I dont know if you can really understand. We have had the same regulations in place for thirty years it is time for a change! What I find funny is that those that are most opposed to this dont even hunt in this area. Something else I would like to add to this and not trying to be degrading But I am willing to bet That many on this site have never even seen or had the chance at trying to harvest a truly large buck (150" or better) It is an amazing thrill one that I gaurentee will leave you feelling weak in the knee's. I know some of you will say that you not into that and that is your choice but I bet that if you have it happen to you once you will want more. Please do not use the reasoning of we are just trying to put some meat in the freezer reasoning because it is a poor one. You can go to the store and buy beef or pork for alot less than you can shoot deer and it tastes better. I do know that there are those that can not eat domestic livestock because of health conditions. I have an uncle with those issues he gets a doe from me every year. This year he got the only deer I shot. Its time for change guys and it's coming if you like it or not. No I am not a fan of more laws But untill the mind set of people feeling they have to harvest a deer to feel succesfull changes this is the way to get results. It goes rite along with another thread I started opposing the youth hunt over MEA. I have recieved alot of negative feed back for opposing that One of the reasons ITs good because it gives kids the chance to be succesfull, Really so if you dont get to harvest a deer the hunt is unsuccesfull. Yes I only shoot bucks that are mature that is by choice for me but when I let the little ones walk it feels good no not as good as sticking a wall hanger but good.

[LOTWSvirgin]

X2 Bottom-Bouncer

[harvey lee]

BigDave

I do shoot numerous deer for myself and others who cannot get out. I purchase the licenses legally and pay for them.

Noone else is shooting the deer for me like party hunting.

I also hunt numerous states for whitetails.

[Big Dave2]

BigDave

I do shoot numerous deer for myself and others who cannot get out. I purchase the licenses legally and pay for them.

Noone else is shooting the deer for me like party hunting.

I also hunt numerous states for whitetails.

No one is shooting deer for you, but you are shooting deer for other people. How is this any different than party hunting?

[Big Dave2]

Why can Wisc and IA shoot the number of mature and or B.C bucks that they do while still allowing cross taging simple they dont gun hunt the rut!

If that is what you know works, why not focus your attention on getting the season moved out of the rut rather than cross-tagging? These are 2 completely different things.

[Getanet]

BottomB, the reason we're commenting on the regs in Zone 3 is because many see this as the snowball that starts an avalanche.

[harvey lee]

I would say the difference is they cannot hunt any longer and I am willing to purchase a tag and shoot one.

Whats wrong with giving a deer to one that does not have the physical needs to hunt?

A party hunter may shoot a deer for another hunting that does not shoot one.

I am not going to argue about helping one out that does not have the ability to hunt.

[InTheNorthwoods]

One point that is highly relevant to many of the different arguments being made here and that I haven't seen mentioned is this:

States such as Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, etc. have (in one form or another) a drawing for some or all of their tags. In Minnesota, any man, woman or child who has hunter safety and isn't a felon can buy a buck tag.

This is relevant because whether or not you have party hunting or not, only a certain number of animals can, or are expected to be harvested based on forecasting by a state game agency.

[picksbigwagon]

I will look into it, but I am pretty sure that Iowa residents can get a buck tag anytime they want. especially in the big 10-15 counties where 98% of the B&C bucks come from....Non residents pay through the nose to get a tag and have to go through a buck lottery.

Last year was the first year they had a county by county quota for out of state doe tags too. I spent a little over 500 dollars last year to doe hunt in Iowa. I will be doing it again this year, why?, I have friends and family that I hunt with down there and will be doing so again this.

[InTheNorthwoods]

I will look into it, but I am pretty sure that Iowa residents can get a buck tag anytime they want. especially in the big 10-15 counties where 98% of the B&C bucks come from....Non residents pay through the nose to get a tag and have to go through a buck lottery.

Last year was the first year they had a county by county quota for out of state doe tags too. I spent a little over 500 dollars last year to doe hunt in Iowa. I will be doing it again this year, why?, I have friends and family that I hunt with down there and will be doing so again this.

I understand that. The point I was making is that there is some limit on the number of tags, and consequently, the number of deer that can be shot. Iowa, for example, does it by limiting the number of non-resident tags it issues. Based on the number of hunters in Iowa (where you are working within a defined number of individuals - i.e. number of residents) may not dictate a drawing for residents at this time, but the game agencies have determined that there is a need to limit non-resident tags.

My point is that the availability of tags is a factor that needs to be considered in many of the arguments being made. As it stands, Minnesota has one of the highest number of tags issued each season and there are no restrictions on how many more can be purchased (by either residents or non-residents) while the number of deer remains constant no matter the number of tags issued.

[harvey lee]

One point that is highly relevant to many of the different arguments being made here and that I haven't seen mentioned is this:

States such as Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, etc. have (in one form or another) a drawing for some or all of their tags. In Minnesota, any man, woman or child who has hunter safety and isn't a felon can buy a buck tag.

This is relevant because whether or not you have party hunting or not, only a certain number of animals can, or are expected to be harvested based on forecasting by a state game agency.

Agreed. That's the way it is in North Dakota. They totally control just how many bucks and does can be taken by rifle or muzzleloader.

If the bucks or does are down, so goes the licenses. They also do this without registration.

[LightningBG]

Seriously, this is how you would change things socially? By belittling a kid's deer? Make him feel small or inferior because he never shot a nice enough one? I can see the kids lining up for that one.

Wow, quite the reaction. Just throwing ideas out there. How would anyone be belittled? Because they dont make the site? Does rewarding or praising someone that does well automatically belittle all others? I'm guessing your a big fan of participation awards and soccer games where they dont keep score?

[ejf76]

Some of the states (I know ND for sure, not sure on the others) that have drawings for buck tags allow more than one buck tag per person if you are hunting with multiple weapons and are selected for the tag. (i.e. bow and rifle)

I would venture to guess that all the pro-party hunters on here would be outraged if MN started to allow people to have more than one buck tage if hunting with multiple weapons. Personally, I agree with the one buck tag per person laws, and believe it should include being able to shoot a buck for another person's tag. The law how it is now (was in Zone 3) is hypocritical and I am glad to see it changed in Zone 3.

I agree with bottom-bouncer. Once people start seeing trophy-caliber bucks more than once every ten years (or never), they will be much more support for the APR regulations. I personally harvested my largest buck to date last year (and with a bow!), and it never would have happened if I would have shot the first buck I saw.

Like I said in an earlier post, I am lucky enough to hunt private land but there is no difference between that land and the surrounding 1000's of acres of state land. Just hunting pressure and the selectivity of the hunters.

[Big Dave2]

I would say the difference is they cannot hunt any longer and I am willing to purchase a tag and shoot one.

Whats wrong with giving a deer to one that does not have the physical needs to hunt?

A party hunter may shoot a deer for another hunting that does not shoot one.

I am not going to argue about helping one out that does not have the ability to hunt.

I don't see what the difference is here. In one breath you state that it is sad when the purpose of hunting for some people is to kill as many deer as possible yet you do just that on a yearly basis.

What is the difference if my party has 5 tags and 2 of the five hunters are able to fill 3 tags or if you go out and kill multiple deer and give the deer away? It's the same thing only you want to shoot the deer yourself and give the dead animal away where I am more than willing to give the tag away and let someone else make the kill.

[Getanet]

I have to admit, I'm scratching my head on Harvey's logic as well. Whether party hunting or the way he does it the end result is multiple dead deer - legally taken. Why is party hunting worse than shooting extra deer you plan to give away?

I don't think Harvey shouldn't be able to do what he does. I just don't see how that's any better or worse than shooting a deer for a member of your hunting party who has given you permission to do so.

[ejf76]

I think the argument of shooting extra deer with your own tags for someone else vs. filling someone else's tag is the reason the state has not (hopefully will not) eliminate party hunting for all deer. If they are going to allow one person to have more than one tag, then in the overall scheme of numbers it makes no difference whether that deer is tagged by the hunter or someone else in the party.

However the state has implemented the one buck per hunter rule, which is why eliminating the cross-tagging of bucks should have been done long ago.

[Jameson]

It's has always been a one buck tag per huhter rule.

If your party chose to make it a one buck per hunter rule it was up to you.

If your reason for being against buck party hunting is because we are a 'one buck per hunter' state, than shouldn't you also be against party hunting for more does than your alloted tags?

I do much of my hunting in a Lottery area, should all party hunting be banned in those areas? Each hunter is only allowed to tag one deer.

[11-87]

Yes, wonderful. Wonder how long til this spreads statewide. (by spread, I mean like cancer)

It's been a slow night at work and I just paged thru all 25 pages of the 2009 deer photos. The best thing about this new law is that we won't have to endure looking at all those grimy little 12-14 yr old brats and their cheesy smiles holding some forkhorn like they had really achieved something positive! First buck, bah! Just turns a guys stomach knowing that deer in 2-3 years coulda been some dedicated hunters 17th Poper.

I believe 12-17 yr old youths can still take any point buck..