doe permits mean does only!!!

[gr8icefishinmind]

I have heard this debate brought up and thought i would bring it here to see what people think!! In our area there are limited numbers of doe permits, what do you think of if you apply and get a doe permit you are able to take doe only! Seems so many people apply and get one and then end up shooting a buck and that doe tag basically goes to waste where someone else could have used it on a doe!! It would also help the buck populations i would think! I have personally never applied for a doe tag but thought it wouild be a good rule!

[Powerstroke]

Disagree.

Getting a doe permit has always meant increasing your odds for shooting a deer. If the rules were changed to mean doe tags mean does only such as in other states where you can by a doe only tag, then there would be fewer antlerless tags allowed.

The DNR gives out say, 5000 tags, in a permit area. They do so knowing that a certain percentage of people won't hunt, some will shoot a buck and some will shoot nothing. If they sold doe only tags then they would probably only offer say, 1000 tags instead of the 5000 permits they give now.

[gr8icefishinmind]

There are actually ALOT of people around this area that would just assume shoot a doe but are not allowed to because people apply for them and run the permits out, but then end up shooting a buck anyway!! I think they would sell just as many doe tags if it was set up this way!!!

[BobT]

I don't think they'd have to reduce the number permits too much, Powerstroke because I suspect that there'd be fewer hunters applying for them to begin with. Given the choice, most of us would rather take a buck than a doe. At least that's what I believe.

I wonder if a better managenment strategy would be to issue X buck and X doe license per area and leave it up to the luck of the draw which one we get when we purchase our license, or first come first serve on preference.

[Surface Tension]

During the 70's there were no doe permits up here in zone 1. Into 80's, getting a doe permit was rare thing. Even seeing deer throughout the year was a rare thing. Doe permits were thought of as an opportunity to better the odds of taking a deer. Hunter success was around 10% back then.

Never in our wildest dreams would we have thought we'd be able to take 5 deer.

Anyway back then taking a doe was last resort because it meant 3 less deer the following season.

In the 90's when the herd was on the climb taking a doe was a means of management to thin the herd.

At no point did anyone feel that an unused doe tag or a shooting a small buck was taking away an opportunity from someone else.

How times have changed.

Now its how the other guy is goofing it up for you.

When you go to herd density of 3 or 4 deer per sq. mile like zone 1 was, I can guaranty attitudes will change about shooting does and building the herd.

We need to remember a deer hunt for one guy can mean something totally different for the next.

[TRZ II]

If having a doe tag meant you could not shoot a buck, who would get one???? Nobody I know would sacrifice their chance at getting a buck to have a chance to get a doe. If it was that important to get meat most I know would just poach?

[CANOPY SAM]

How times have changed.

Now its how the other guy is goofing it up for you.

Well said Frank.

[LightningBG]

I think the #s would certainly change.

If the DNRs goal for a particular zone is to take out 1000 does, they will certainly issue more than 1000 tags. They may offer that 4000, knowing that 1000 will shoot a buck, 1000 will shoot a doe, 1000 will shoot nothing and 1000 will not even hunt.

If the success ratio per tag increases, they will offer less tags.

[Jameson]

If having a doe tag meant you could not shoot a buck, who would get one???? ...

The hunters who hunt in parties (groups.) My first two years deer hunting was with 11 others, so 12 of us total, and typically we got 2 doe permits for the group. End of the seasons results were 2 does and 2 bucks being shot. I no longer hunt with that party, but they would be happy to buy doe tags for some of the hunters knowing they could party hunt bucks on the other's tags.

[skee0025]

If having a doe tag meant you could not shoot a buck, who would get one????

I would.

[walleyehunter80]

I think doe permits are great for meat hunters like my father, He passes on all does untill the end of season waiting for a mature buck the last two days of season game on and a doe will die

[JimmyJames]

I apply for a doe tag every year, knowing I will never shoot one. I hunt what is now 171, deer numbers are way too low.

[Red Miller]

First of all, they are no such things as "doe tags". They are antlerless permits. They are used to manage numbers of deer in an area and have the fringe benefit of increasing odds of taking an animal. As far as "meat hunting" goes?...there should be no other reason to kill the animal. Antlers are just a feather in your hat. In my opinion, killing an animal just to hang the anlters on the wall is misguided. I resent this attitude that meat hunitng is a bad thing or old fashioned! Sure bagging a trophy buck is great fun but lets not forget why we are out there. Our tradition of hunting is based on harvesting for food...not bones.

[brittman]

You are giving the DNR too much credit here.

Using doe permints to manage the deer heard, it is all about selling licenses.

Winter in MN is theo only real manager of the deer heard population.

DNR and wolves over (miss) manage the deer heard.

[jerkbait]

Red Miller, perfectly said!!!!!!!!!!!!! I completely agree.

[Fishpondc]

Right on, Red Miller!!!

[Huskie]

I also agree with Red Miller. We have no problem taking ananterless deer if we have been drawn in the lottery. Shooting a buck gives us more props at the bar/grill. The DNR management plans seem to leave a lot to be desired, but I would hope they have the best interest of the public and the herd in mind--usually two different dynamics!!!

[Rippinlip]

Right on Red!!!!!!!

Grilled antlers are way overated!

[nonteepical]

Our tradition of hunting is based on harvesting for food...not bones.

Thats true, but todays hunting is based on population control, how many animals can the land sustain without risk to disease, crop damage ect.

I have yet to meet a hunter who has shot a wall hanger and has thrown out the carcass or hasn't eaten the animal, all because they were selective in what they shot. I have meet self proclaimed meat hunters who have taken too many animals they can eat in a year, and thrown out venison because the next deer season has arrived and they are making room for more "fresh" venison.

[gr8icefishinmind]

the thing i was trying to get at was that there are ALOT of people who are unable to get a doe tag and don't hunt because of it. And there are alot of people who apply for the doe tags that really don't need to cause they are going to shoot a buck either way.

this wasn't supposed to be a which tastes better debate cause unless you process 100% of your deer on your own, it is getting mixed in with others meat at the butcher!! Unless your meat locker will give you your own meat if you do all the butchering like mine does!!

[smnduck]

You can't eat the antlers. Is that what you are hunting for? Ego?

[hockeybc69]

Plenty of people fish for big fish. And nothing else.

Are all you naysayers also against that too? Guessing not everyone.

Bring on Antler Point Restrictions I say. Been eons of brown its down. Now lets change the game for some of us wanting a little different angle on the sport. I sure wish APR comes to area 240. Bring it on!!!!

[flipper]

When it comes to fishing people have wised up. They use to say throw it back, it is too small. Now they have come to realize that it is better to harvest the smaller ones and release the big ones. I know I am in the minority here but I think that kind of thinking can be applied to the deer herd. I say let the more mature bucks stay in the herd and harvest the smaller ones and the does to eat.

I think a lot of the younger hunters have spent too much time watching the TV hunting shows and think they are going to get a trophy buck each time they go hunting.

[gr8icefishinmind]

When it comes to fishing people have wised up. They use to say throw it back, it is too small. Now they have come to realize that it is better to harvest the smaller ones and release the big ones. I know I am in the minority here but I think that kind of thinking can be applied to the deer herd. I say let the more mature bucks stay in the herd and harvest the smaller ones and the does to eat.

I think a lot of the younger hunters have spent too much time watching the TV hunting shows and think they are going to get a trophy buck each time they go hunting.

I personally like the challenge of scouting out a big buck and waiting and waiting to get a chance to shoot that deer. It all starts for me in the spring with food plots and putting out cameras to see what has made it through the winter months, so i really see nothing wrong with holding off for a big deer, it is part of the HUNTING aspect!!! I am all for shooting a small buck if it looks like it has bad genes though, like with a goofed up rack!

[leech~~]

First year hunting zone 1 after hunting zone 2 for about 30 years. I wish I would have had one of those Doe tags because that's all I seen and all of them were hours before it snowed last Sat. Did not see a deer the weekend before! Please send your unwanted Doe meat I have some old antlers I can trade!