No more party hunting in Zone 3, SE MN

[LightningBG]

Which is all well and good if you're there for the meat, but what happens if that buck is a "trophy", then who puts it on the wall? I am guessing the guy who shot it. So really that hunter has a chance at a trophy, whatever that may be to him, on two separate tags per season.

True, but he may also have a chance at Zero, if his buddy blasts 2 before he sees anything. Just the chance you take when pooling resources.

[ejf76]

[quote name='LightningBG

I could see it for sure. Pretend like it never happened. You'll get in trouble either way right? (not condoning).

Think anyone has ever accidentally shot a hen pheasant?

I've been a part of a hunting party that was on a special doe only hunt in another state. One of the guys (40 yr hunting veteran) accidentally shot a buck. Who knows how it happened' date=' but it did. We called the CO immediately and he came and got the deer a couple hours latter. Said it happens all the time, thanks for calling. [/quote']

I can definitely see this happening and it will be too bad. A couple of ways to look at it. Hopefully the antler restrictions will force people to take more time before they shoot and hopefully make cleaner kills. Maybe that will help to offset the problem that may arise with abandoning those that don't meet the APR.

I think Lightning is on the right page with the CO response as well. My guess is if you make a mistake and call a CO, he may take the deer for vension donation but he will probably thank you for reporting it and not issue a citation. Now on the other hand if you are caught leaving one lay (hard to enforce) or trying to get by with shooting a non-qualifying buck, I would guess they will be pretty hard on those people to make sure the new regs are enforced

just a guess though...

[Coach1310]

coach I understand what you are saying about it being fair. But in all reality there is no comparision between the gun and a bow. I personally feel good out to 50 yds with my bow rarely am I set up to shoot that far but would have no problem if the oppurtunity arose. Amost all of my bow stands require the deer to present itself at 25 yds or less for a clean shot. With the rifle I am good out to atleast 200yds and there are many people who can reach out alot further. Point being As a bow hunter your odds are already stacked against you And to harvest mature bucks you better be on your A game because they are always even during the peak of the chase phase. Were as if someone has a gun there is so much room for error in your ability. I guess I could go with the stand bye they di it in iowa and wisconsin and it works. wich is why (fingers crossed) I will be in Iowa this fall in early november

The issue still remains that this idea of moving the gun hunt out of the rut is to help allow for more, mature bucks. IF our primary goal is MORE MATURE BUCKS then there should be ZERO hunting for them during the rut, no matter what the weapon. Yeah, they have the non rut gun hunt in Iowa and Wisconsin, BUT was it ever during the rut??? Did it have to be changed?? Change is a really hard thing to justify sometimes....

[lakevet]

Another reason to stop cross tagging bucks. Dont they (who ever DNR,experts) say that 20% of the hunters shoot 80% of the deer. Reality says some people just arent as good at hunting as others. If you stop the good hunters from shooting the bucks that others lack the ability or experience to harvest That equates to alot of bucks living to see another season.

Mn DNR stats report that cross tagging ban would reduce buck harvest only 7 to 10%. Not what I would call "alot of bucks". APR's will reduce buck harvest 70% initially.

Bottom bouncer, with all due respect, could you give the specific reference/study that you are referencing that 20% of hunters shoot 80% of deer?

lakevet

[psepuncher]

question for Lou,

On Minnesota deer herds breeding issue.

Are there any reaserch studies on percentage

of mature vs. yearling bucks breeding does?

Thanks.

[picksbigwagon]

You might have better luck emailing Lou at the DNR directly......

[lakevet]

\

Which is all well and good if you're there for the meat, but what happens if that buck is a "trophy", then who puts it on the wall? I am guessing the guy who shot it. So really that hunter has a chance at a trophy, whatever that may be to him, on two separate tags per season

That trophy is in our group pictures (everyone gets a copy) because usually it is group effort (drives, advice on where to solo sit for the evening , the old guide treatment for those less experienced, etc). It may be on the wall at some one's home, in a box with a bunch of other racks in my Dad's garage, or cousin's farm shop, or cousin's cabin wall for all to enjoy. Again we tend to be more group/family oriented and work hard to put each other first and deer second. Makes for a safer hunt also with that mindset.

lakevet

[BLACKJACK]

Does anybody see a problem with people shooting small bucks, and just leaving them?? or not tagging them and just taking it home to butcher without registration if they get one that isn't of 4 pt restrictions?

[Bear55]

question for Lou,

On Minnesota deer herds breeding issue.

Are there any reaserch studies on percentage

of mature vs. yearling bucks breeding does?

Thanks.

I read an article in Deer and Deer hunting a while back that covered a study of penned deer and used DNA testing to see what bucks produced what fawns. The bucks that bread does were spread out fairly even among all age classes of bucks with the middle aged 2.5 to 4.5 year old breading at a slightly higher percentage then the younger 1.5 and fully mature 5.5+ year old bucks. It also showed does with twin fawns that had different fathers which I thought was kind of interesting.

This test was done in a controlled environment with a balanced do buck ratio, when your buck population is full of 1.5 year old buck and very few older deer the stats could be much different.

[MOSSY]

lets make the does grow antlers and see if the "antler hounds" are happy shooting a 130 pound doe just for the antlers or do they want a 180 pound buck with no antlers.If all they are looking for is a mature deer it should not matter.I bet most in favor of antler point restriction would shoot the antlered doe because of the rack not the non antlered buck (bigger deer).

personally it wouldn't matter to me.(I haven't found a good recipe for antlers yet)

Mossy

[Bear55]

Mossy your not suppose to eat the antlers but I guess if you don't like them by all means take a doe instead.

[nonteepical]

Blog > What We Do > Articles > Deer Biology/Management > Protecting Yearling Bucks (February 2006)

Protecting Yearling Bucks (February 2006)QDMA Articles

By: Kip Adams

Many hunters unfamiliar with Quality Deer Management (QDM) incorrectly assume QDM is only about large-antlered bucks. Many also feel antler point restrictions (APRs) are synonymous with QDM. Pieces from both of these beliefs can be parts of QDM programs but QDM is about much more than just antlers or APRs.

In simplest terms QDM involves balancing the deer herd with the habitat and having deer – bucks and does – in multiple age classes. Determining and achieving the right number of deer for the habitat is a topic for another discussion and this article will focus on multiple age classes of deer. Most areas have a good age structure for the doe population as it is common for hunters to harvest does 1.5-6.5+yrs. This age structure exists because of traditional deer management practices where hunters focused much of their harvest pressure on bucks and allowed does to survive and fill multiple age classes.

Very few places have this same age structure for the buck population. Typical buck populations include a high percentage (60-80%) of yearlings, a small percentage (10-30%) of 2.5yr olds, an even smaller percentage (5-10%) of 3.5yr olds and almost no 4.5+yr olds. This young age structure is a direct result of harvest pressure by hunters. In the not-too-distant past most hunters focused intense pressure on yearling bucks and removed the majority of that age class. In historical Pennsylvania for example, hunters routinely removed over 80% of the yearling age class on an annual basis! With that removal rate, less than 1% of Pennsylvania’s bucks ever reached maturity.

Quality Deer Management helps correct this imbalance by protecting young bucks and allowing them to survive into the older age classes. Quality Deer Management isn’t about protecting bucks until they are 5.5yrs old – that’s trophy management. Quality Deer Management, in simplest terms is about protecting yearling bucks. Yearling bucks are the easiest adult deer to harvest, but if hunters pass them and allow them to reach 2.5yrs, they become a little smarter and some will avoid hunters and reach 3.5yrs. Some of those will then avoid hunters and reach 4.5yrs, etc. Pretty soon you end up with a deer population that has bucks in multiple age classes even while allowing bucks 2.5yrs and older to be harvested. A complete age structure is good for deer and great for hunters.

The big question then is what is the best way to protect yearling bucks? There are several techniques to protect yearlings and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Antler point restrictions are a common technique and they involve establishing a minimum number of points a buck must possess to be eligible for harvest. This minimum number should be established with the aid of a biologist and with local harvest data. Advantages of APRs include they are simple and are easy for state agencies to enforce. The disadvantage of APRs is the number of antler points is a poor predictor of animal age. Yearling bucks can have a rack ranging from short spikes to 10+ points. Therefore it can be difficult with APRs to protect the majority of the yearling age class while still making other age classes available for harvest. Managers may unintentionally focus harvest pressure on yearlings with larger racks or protect older age classes. However, because of APRs simplicity and enforceability, they are the most common buck harvest restriction discussed and implemented by state agencies.

Antler width restrictions are another technique and they involve establishing a minimum width of antler spread a buck possess have to be eligible for harvest. Again, this width should be established with the aid of a biologist and from local harvest data. The premise of a width restriction is few yearling bucks attain an outside antler spread of more than 15-16 inches. Hunters can estimate a buck’s antler spread by viewing where the antlers are in relation to an animal’s forward pointed ears. Ear tip to tip distance is approximately 15-16 inches for northern deer and slightly less for southern deer. Therefore, if a buck’s antlers are as wide as or wider than his ears, there is a good chance he is at least 2.5yrs. The advantage of a width restriction is it is a much better predictor of whether a buck is 1.5 or 2.5+yrs and therefore can do a better job protecting yearlings. Disadvantages of a width restriction include it is slightly more difficult to determine the legal status of a buck in the wild (vs. APR), it can be more difficult for state agencies to enforce, and some mature bucks can have tall, narrow racks that are less than 16 inches wide. A width restriction is more biologically sound than an APR and therefore is commonly used on private lands where managers have more control over the deer management program.

A third technique is age restrictions based on body characteristics. This technique involves establishing the age classes available for harvest (2.5+yrs for this discussion), and hunters then use body – not antler – characteristics to determine eligible bucks. Distinguishable body changes occur as deer progress through age classes and this technique requires hunters to be skilled in identifying those changes. The advantage of this technique is it is an excellent predictor of animal age and therefore you can either target or protect multiple age classes of bucks. The disadvantage of this technique is it requires time and practice for hunters to learn the body characteristics of each age class and be able to accurately estimate the age of live bucks in the wild. This technique is currently practiced on some of the most intensively managed properties throughout the country and is the future of deer management for many hunters. This technique is a lot of fun and is very rewarding for true whitetail enthusiasts. Age restrictions are by far the most biologically sound approach and are therefore used for the majority of intensive management programs. Due to the skill involved and practice required by hunters this approach is most commonly used by private land managers and unfortunately is rarely even discussed by state agencies.

Two final techniques are “earn-a-buck” programs and buck harvest quotas. Both of these programs restrict the number of bucks that get harvested rather than the age of bucks that get harvested. Earn-a-buck programs are typically used in areas of high deer density where managers must force hunters to remove additional antlerless deer. The premise of this technique is a hunter must harvest an antlerless deer to receive (or validate) his/her buck tag. A hunter that doesn’t help the management program by harvesting a doe is not permitted to shoot a buck. This technique protects some bucks because not all hunters will have the opportunity to harvest a buck after harvesting an antlerless deer. Buck harvest quotas are similar to what most states currently use to limit the antlerless harvest. With this technique, managers issue a limited number of buck tags and thus some bucks are protected because not all hunters receive a tag.

There are many ways to protect numbers or specific age classes of bucks. No technique is perfect but they all have advantages. The challenge is to educate hunters on the benefits and limitations of each and achieve broad-based support for the selected technique. Hunter support is crucial and it can take a management program to the next level or dump it in the gutter. In general, the most biologically sound techniques provide the most benefits but all of the techniques can improve a deer management program when applied correctly.

So, is QDM just about large-antlered bucks and are APRs synonymous with QDM? The first answer is obviously “no”. Quality Deer Management is about balancing the deer herd with the habitat and having bucks and does in multiple age classes. You end up with larger bucks because they are a byproduct of good deer management. The second answer is also “no”; APRs are merely one technique to get bucks into multiple age classes. Antler point restrictions are not the most biologically sound approach, but as Pennsylvania and other states have shown, they can be effective when applied correctly.

Kip’s Korner is written by Kip Adams, a Certified Wildlife Biologist and Northern Director of Education and Outreach for the Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA). The QDMA is an international nonprofit wildlife conservation organization dedicated to ethical hunting, sound deer management and preservation of the deer-hunting heritage. The QDMA can be reached at 1-800-209-DEER

[Jameson]

...Antler point restrictions are not the most biologically sound approach...

straight from QDMA

[mabr]

Dont you just love snippits!!!

So to those who oppose this would you be willing to accept the width of spread? I as well as the majority who pushed this would be much more in favor of width vs point restriction.

[pulleye16]

lets make the does grow antlers and see if the "antler hounds" are happy shooting a 130 pound doe just for the antlers or do they want a 180 pound buck with no antlers.If all they are looking for is a mature deer it should not matter.I bet most in favor of antler point restriction would shoot the antlered doe because of the rack not the non antlered buck (bigger deer).

personally it wouldn't matter to me.(I haven't found a good recipe for antlers yet)

Mossy

I don't think we need to reverse argue this subject. Antlers are exactly what their after and thats no argument. If people want to only shoot large deer for the antlers (I guess buck or Doe now) then those people should have their rights. I just don't like those hunters telling fellow hunters that WE'RE wrong for just wanting to shoot any size deer for the meat, or like others, just enjoy shooting a deer in general (Cause not everyone is out there for a large rack). Once you change a law....it's very hard to get it back. Just cause YOU want something doesn't mean everyone else does. Practice your own beleifs and quit trying to change things based on that. I had to stop saying the pledge of allegiance in school cause some group didn't like "one nation under god". Taxis stop running drunk people around in MN cause alcohol was against their belief. Can't have any thing that even closely resembles christmas in public building anymore. I could go on and on....

[Trashguy]

pulleye, I couldn't have said it any better!

[MOSSY]

+1 PULLEYE

[lakevet]

+2 pulleye

[james_walleye]

Pulleye i have one problem with your statement. This comes from a zone 3 hunter who has followed this situation very closely. Polls of hunters in zone 3 show the majority of zone 3 hunters wanted something done to protect young bucks. In zone 3 this isnt something where a small group of hunters are pushing onto a large majority. This is the MN DNR seeing after many years that the majority is on board with protection and moving forward with it. APR's have been introduced elsewhere with hunter support growing drastically after 3 years of seeing results and you will see the same thing happen in zone 3. APR's are not a new concept. They have been introducted with success in other states and SE MN will be added to that list.

Sure looks like the mindset here in SE MN is different than other parts of the state judging by this thread.

[james_walleye]

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.

The APRs do not apply to youth PEAT.

[psepuncher]

+4 pulleye

[11-87]

I guess this year we take every doe we can. we all know what government does...once something is changed, it neer goes back. and will "Spread" through the state like CWD!!

Next let's see if we can get the DNR to put Tail Restrictions on Pheasants. I want to shoot birds with 24-28" tails. and hope the Beard restrictions on turkeys happen so I can always shood a Tom with a 12-16" beard...

Looks like a Small group of Hunters got what they wanted!! now we all have to pay...

[james_walleye]

Small group of hunters?? You mean the majority of hunters in SE MN. Might want to check your facts. The majority of hunters polled in zone 3 wanted protection for young bucks.

[PurpleFloyd]

Maybe this will work in Z3. That being said, I hunt in zone 4 and can say that where I hunt there are other factors that are controlling the hunt and the herd which have no correlation to QDM.

For instance lets just look at the south central zone and how things have changed in the past 30 or so years. in the 80's in this farming area there were several farms per mile and the size of farms were fairly small. Generally the 4 row corn head was as big as it got and grain was hauled in wagons behind a tractor or pickup truck.Deer hunting season always resulted in fields of standing corn as the equipment and the genetics of the corn restricted the amount that could be harvested in a week even though there were larger numbers of farmers. This was a good control on the population because the corn was a refuge and deer could hide in the larger fields through the weekend and this resulted in many large bucks in this area never getting harvested.

At the end of the decade or so there was a shift to larger combines that could take 6 and then 8 rows of corn and all of a sudden it became common for all of the corn to be out before the season. This really limited the places a deer could hide and I know that in this area the percentage of filled tags went up as did the number of mature bucks harvested.

Lately the trend has been that even though the equipment is getting bigger and the fields can be harvested faster, the size of farms has grown to the point that even in good years there are still fields that do not get harvested and those fields tend to be big- like up to 240 acres vs. 40-80 in the past. this expanse of cover is the single greatest insurance policy against mature bucks being harvested. Once they figure out it is safe in the corn they go there straight off and they will not come out in the daylight. The consolidation of land from many to fewer also means that some are getting larger areas to hunt with less pressure while tracts owned by those who do not allow hunting are giving larger sanctuary for the deer herd which either sucks or is great depending on what side of the fence you are on.

the preceding was not necessarily a vote for or against QDM but a reminder that there are so many factors that control a herd and they are changing at such a pace that I am not sure how it can be counted on as a rule over an extended period of time. In a way it very closely shadows the whole capitalist vs socialist debate where in one corner you have a group who says you should be self reliant and he who is good enough or lucky enough should reap the rewards while the less fortunate should just learn to go without. only the capitalists are looking to the government to step in and institute governmental oversight instead of relying on people to make decisions on their own which I find very interesting. Think about it.

Personally I like to eat venison. I have never eaten a rack in my life and I would not be happy if the government told me I had to go a year or 3 without venison just because a 10 pointer didn't walk by me.

[11-87]

No Small Group. I haven't yet found anyone that hunts my area that's happy with these changes.

no I believe I've read that MDH didn't want APR, and Blufflands Pushed and Got it. now if the two groups can't come together who expects the rest of us to as well??

According to the DNR 5 year study, public opinion and input revealed a split in the attitudes about new regulations. Maybe they should have figured that not everyone is in favor of changes.

WHY NOT CHARGE and SURCHARGE Licenses According to what you want to shoot or have shot. Want to shoot 10pt or larger pay more, want to shoot 4-8pt.. pay less. We have all kinds of fees and regs already why not a few more.. Oh yea.. we could have it based off green score.. and then again.. we could later take it to fisherman.. and have them registar all fish caught and pay the "length Tax"..