Deer Idea

[lakevet]

Lakevet, its great that you feel so passionately about gifting your tag. Of course, you've never answered my question from a previous about why you would need to gift a tag if multiple are available. I guess I'll get my answer when you get yours about Iowa and Wisconsin.

As for gifting a tag so one person can shoot multiple bucks, I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. I can see it in some cases, but not many.

Apologize if I came across as misrepresenting your position. The following is about the cross tagging issue in general.

You don't have to gift if multiple tags are available. However, only multiple doe tags are available anywhere in MN. Multiple buck tags are not. You can only shoot two bucks a year if

1) Someone gifts you a tag

or

2) You have the money and time to hunt multiple states.

or

3) You poach to get your picture in the paper/ magazine with a buck named after you. This includes those who break EXISTING laws by using the tag of someone who is not afield at the same time but back at the shack, etc.

Option 2 is not possible for most of us, especially if you are talking about taking all the kids.

Hopefully those doing option 3 get caught.

I clearly remember when the doe permit was coveted above all. I also remember years when doe permits went unfilled after 16 days of hard hunting and no one in our party was able to harvest a doe for that permit as a party hunting group. Some areas are now back to that. In those areas it is the gift of the doe permit that is valued highly.

This discussion definitely is influenced somewhat by where you hunt in this state. Up here you generally don't see a parade of 30 to 40 deer in a morning as some of my friends see regularly on their farms in SE MN. Usually don't see that many in a season total up here. Opportunity to shoot multiple bucks in a pile is rare up here, but know friends who have shot 3 to 4 bucks in a hour in farm country. APR's would limit their buck take. Ban cross tagging and you still would at the end of the season have about the same number of dead bucks.

Glad you can see gifting a tag in some instances a least. The kids (and their parents/grandparents) in our group thank you.

We still get to CHOOSE how OUR tag will be used except for experimental regs in zone 3. Banning gifting of buck tags will not make a significant difference in buck harvest. It does take away for 100% of the hunters, the choice of being able to enjoy the long standing MN tradition of gifting your buck tag.

I have said little against APR's even though I personally am against them. However, they are clearly documented as "saving" over 80% of young bucks during a rut hunt. I have yet to see the same significant impact documented anywhere for banning party hunting/cross tagging. If I told you no trail cams, or no deer calls, or no heated box stands, ( or whatever your preferred method you enjoy) because banning your favorite method would save 7% of the bucks, would you feel that is a fair situation that is worth implementing laws banning it? I talked to 3 guys yesterday who had no clue that the party hunting ban would have so little effect. I think that if the survey on hunter preferences would also give the hunters the corresponding % of bucks "saved " by that law/ban, hunters would decide more on the basis of facts instead of impressions.

Every time I have read about the new regs in zone three, stats are given about the high % of young bucks saved by APR's, followed by a brief mention of party hunting for bucks banned , and no stats of how successful (very low) the banning of cross tagging of whitetail bucks is in changing the buck population structure. Why are those stats not clearly presented repeatedly?

The reg changes (APR's and ban on cross tagging at the same time) will result in the trumpeting of the success of cross tagging ban, when in reality it will be almost completely due to APR's and very little to do with banning tag gifting. Cross tagging ban is tucked in on the coat tails of APR's because it can't stand alone.

Again, waiting for rebuttal on Iowa and Wisconsin partying hunt bucks and Minnesota dominated the Book bucks years ago when the hunt was Thanksgiving week, post peak rut and party hunting was legal. Minnesota dominated the book buck production with party hunting legal. Then, the hunt was moved to over the rut. Party hunting is not the problem, that is a misrepresentation.

Great discussion, have a Happy Thanksgiving!

lakevet

[HunterLee]

Its not the legal party hunting that is so much the problem, its the party hunting where half the group muzzleloads, and they shoot bucks for the half that doesn't then go and shoot there own, or the shooting of bucks for people that don't hunt at all. By going back to hunting either only one firearm season would cure that problem. Getting a good buck with a muzzleloader is fairly easy if you have access to a good spot, its one of the few times of the year they have to drop their guard and move during the daylight.

Its more the extended time a person gets to shoot a buck. People could hunt for a straight 3.5 months if they wanted. With 9 days or 16 depending on the area with a rifle and another 16 with a muzzleloader. Before it was just a basic 2 to 4 days with a rifle or if the muzzleloader hunted they got just 16. Not up to 32 if they choose.

Something needs to change to give them a chance to make it another year

[lakevet]

Your stats from the DNR saying its only 7% I seriously doubt. I don’t know many guys,(including our party) who admit that my buddy took it instead of me when their checking it in or dropping it off at the processors. I guess it’s the guys thing.

Now the one time I MIGHT be ok with it is if the area is Intensive harvest, I’m still a little leery on that for the same reasons. Does? No problem but not bucks.

We have to use the stats available. You make the excellent point the stats may by skewed. That may be true, and someone smarter than me can go into detail on that. But when stats are cited to make a decision, and those are the only stats available, they are better than a guess or opinion with no numbers to support the point of view. Hopefully better stats become available with time.

Here is a reference for the stats on how much the buck harvest is reduced by apr's (75% of yearling bucks and 5% of 2 year olds) and by cross tagging ban (about 7% to 10% of bucks....90 to 93 % that were shot before still get shot with a cross tagging ban)

hopefully this reference is OK to post

www.outdoornews.com/minnesota/news/article_0767a83d-2eb7-5efa-aef1-9aebec27f197.html

it is stated regarding cross tagging ban:

"The regulation likely won't change the harvest of antlered deer much-about 7 percent to 10 percent of successful hunters kill two bucks"

Remember "about 7 percent to 10 percent of hunters kill 2 bucks" is under "shoot any buck during a rut hunt" situation. The % of bucks cross tagged would be even lower in areas with APR's or post rut hunting.

The banning of cross tagging / taking away the gifting of tags will not significantly improve the buck population size or structure.

APR's have stats that show a very significant impact.

Party hunting and more mature bucks easily coexist in our neighbors east and south of us.

"Giving the gift of a buck tag" is being taken away by those who personally judge it wrong, but can not show that it will achieve any significant progress towards their goal of more mature bucks. I wish they would focus on regs that are backed by stats that show a better return on investment.

And I respect Lou for his opinion and in no way should this be taken as a slight against him in any way. He has a "Hot Seat" of a job. He is also entitled to his point of view. I sincerely believe he has MN deer hunters and our herd's best interests as his goal.

lakevet

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

The banning of cross tagging / taking away the gifting of tags will not significantly improve the buck population size or structure.

The key here is that it is an improvement though. However small it is.

As my boss many years ago said, "Baby steps"

Its a start.....

[Gordie]

This is out of the hunting regs plain and simple

Important! The intent of the party hunting regulation is to

prevent parties from shooting more deer than the available number

of tags. The party hunting regulation requires that all hunters who

intend to tag deer for each other be hunting together, in the field, at

the time the deer are taken. Party members who are not afield hunting

with the individual who takes a deer at the time it is taken may

not legally tag that deer. Hunters may not lend licenses to or borrow

licenses from other hunters.

[mabr]

Hey Lakevet, Iowa, Wisc, - I think were on the same page.

Move our season out, start this weekend IMO. But I'm in the minority on this subject as I was with min width instead of points.

On a plus side, I seriously believe were staring to see education being a bigger factor than regulation can ever do. I'm glad zone 3 went to APR, IMO it will help educate hunters and we will see selective harvest become the norm for a larger group of hunters.

Happy Thanks Giving all

[candiru]

In the more agricultural areas of the state moving the season back may make matters worse. The corn will be picked every year. The population has not recovered from the all-season license fiasco yet. Most all of Wisc. sits south of Duluth. I would hate to think of hunting any later up north. Temps around zero and enough snow to impair getting around will not lead to a more enjoyable hunt, not to mention no rut to move the deer. It also increases the odds of a major winter storm coinciding with deer season. Throwing obstacles in peoples way is not good for the future of hunting.

In fairness, if you are not going to allow gun hunters to hunt the rut, the bow season during the rut needs to be closed as well. If gun hunters are going to give something up, the bow hunters need to as well. No biological reason but you need to do it to be fair.

[NoWiser]

Lakevet,

If I'm correct, I think that the study says that currently 7-10% of successful hunters kill 2 or more bucks. I really don't think you can translate this into saying that banning crosstagging will only save 7-10% of bucks. In reality (and I have no statistics to back this up), I have to think that it would save significantly more bucks than that. You would be right if you can assume that everyone who shot their first buck would also take that buck if cross-tagging were banned. Saving the second buck is only half the story. You are forgetting about the people who will let that small first buck walk in the hopes that a bigger one will come by, knowing that if they shoot it, buck hunting is over for them. Most of those people will plug the young buck now, knowing if the big one comes by they can shoot him, too. This, I think, is the main goal of the crosstag ban. Its only purpose isn't just to keep people from shooting two bucks, its to make people more selective in when shooting their first.

I guess I just don't understand how people can be so against this idea. Everyone can still shoot the buck of their choice and, in many cases, can also take one or more does. My personal opinion is that if you need to shoot multiple bucks every year, you are just plain being greedy. Every buck you shoot after your own is one that someone else won't see. In essence, every opportunity you "gift" to someone, is also one that you steal from someone else.

Just my two cents.....

[kelly-p]

There are a lot of views and ideas in this long topic but a few statements really jumped out at me. Also what would be good management in one part of the state would be a disaster in another part of the state.

“sorry but that is not true a mature buck has a much better chance at surviving a tough winter after the rut than a young buck.”

Maybe in farm country but it is my understanding that here during a tough winter the fawns die off first because they are too small to bust through the snow and too short to reach the browse where bigger deer have already fed. The mature bucks die off next because they have run off all or most of their fat reserves during the rut. They have nothing left to fall back on if food gets scarce. Also early in the winter a big rack makes it a lot harder to escape the wolves. Thick brush that a smaller racked buck can slip through to escape will slow down or stop a buck with a larger rack. Years ago my cousin shot one of the biggest bucks I have ever seen. When the biologists looked at it at the registration station they said that it was 4 1/2 years old. Also that it would have died that winter as its teeth were completely worn off from eating brush. Would that happen in farm country?

“99% of licensed hunters cant feed their family cheaper on a deer than they could on other foods. Especially with food stamps and all the other programs out there if people are truly hurting that bad.”

I realize that a big part of present day society feels that Government should provide all their needs but there are still people across MN that feel that to have to go to the Government for help is a stain on the family name that lasts for generations. Every fall all across MN there are families legally harvesting deer and butchering them for the meat to put in the freezer. The kids too young to handle a knife are picking hair or helping Mom package the meat for the freezer. The family is involved together to try to make things a little better for them because every piece of that meat is one more piece of meat that they do not have buy in a store. Maybe as Dad is boning the deer out he is hoping they can cut the food budget enough to make it a little easier to pay the January truck payment. That little girl over there picking hair off that piece of venison,,,,,,,she is hoping that with the money they save maybe Mom cam buy her a pair of those new cool gloves like her friend at school has. As they process the deer the children learn how a poorly placed shot ruins meat that they could have used. Sure they would be proud and happy if that deer had a big rack but they realize that the meat has great value and that meat will not be just ground into sausage but rather once or twice a week Mom is cooking venison for supper.

Are you saying that this family and others should go on food stamps so that you have a better chance of shooting a big buck?

An elderly couple has worked hard their entire life. They were never a burden on Gov. but now they are living on Social Security and their savings. Getting their deer in the fall has always been an important part of their lives. The husband has the start of Parkinson's and it is getting hard to walk around or hold a gun steady. Twice in the past few months he has gone off alone and gotten his vehicle stuck and the community has searched franticly for him. His wife no longer lets him go anywhere alone. They live in a Lottery area and they did not get a doe tag.

Are you saying that they should go on food stamps? Are you saying that it would be wrong for me to take him hunting with me and shoot a young buck for him because that would be party hunting AND a young buck?

“So with that being said one unit may have 4000 tags availble, and now 6000 people want them, well that means 2000 won't get. So they will apply for a second and third choice and if they are unsuccessful then they would have to buy a leftover tag in a unit that has tags left or not hunt.”

Then if I apply for but do not get a tag where I live I would then have to apply somewhere else in the state. Then I could not take my Grandchildren hunting and sit in the same exact place I sat with my Grandfather deer hunting decades ago. In fact I could not even hunt my land right where I live but would have to go somewhere else in the state. Sure maybe it would be nice to hunt the farm country of MN where there are way more deer with way bigger racks and it is easier to hunt but that would not be the same as going someplace and remembering that big buck I saw there years ago that drifted right past me and never gave me a decent shot. Or this place here, “the hole in the elm”, this is where my Grandfather shot his last buck. Over there is where me and my cousin sat in “Clarita’s Stand” with our BB guns before we were old enough to have rifles and the big buck and doe walked past us. Just up the trail is where my Uncle dropped his rifle and broke the peep sight off so he tied the sight back on with his shoelace and shot that nice 10 pointer. But,,,,,,,,my family can't deer hunt here any more so somebody else in the state can have a chance at a bigger buck.

All in all it seems to me that maybe we need to start enjoying the time we can deer hunt either alone or with our family and friends and less about feeling that we have to shoot a buck with a big rack to have an enjoyable hunt.

I think that the best way for most of MN to get bigger bucks is that they should make it a law that everybody has to deer hunt in the county they live in.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Kelly P,

Bravo!

[psepuncher]

Every buck you shoot after your own is one that someone else won't see. Just my two cents.....

sure they will,

I know that you can post pictures somewhere on this site...

[reinhard1]

very well said. just out for big racks? go for it. the rest of us will settle for some fine eating. i have nothing against people who want that trophy and that is their goal and enjoy the most important part of the hunt just being out there. this does not mean when i party hunt i am out to kill anything i see thats brown and down. i personaly dont shoot fawns but will down a two year old. as long as you have a license and a tag for the deer it is your right to make the choice between meat or something for the wall or both. good luck.

[Gordie]

My hats off to you Kelly P

Thank you

[pulleye16]

Good work Kelly-P

sorry about my previous post elwood!

[matchset]

Are you saying that this family and others should go on food stamps so that you have a better chance of shooting a big buck?

An elderly couple has worked hard their entire life. They were never a burden on Gov. but now they are living on Social Security and their savings. Getting their deer in the fall has always been an important part of their lives. The husband has the start of Parkinson's and it is getting hard to walk around or hold a gun steady. Twice in the past few months he has gone off alone and gotten his vehicle stuck and the community has searched franticly for him. His wife no longer lets him go anywhere alone. They live in a Lottery area and they did not get a doe tag.

Are you saying that they should go on food stamps? Are you saying that it would be wrong for me to take him hunting with me and shoot a young buck for him because that would be party hunting AND a young buck?

i think this "scenario" is sad, and a true heart gripper. but i do not think it holds much merit in the topic of this discussion

buying a lisc. is not not a guarantee that you'll shoot a deer; and a man in his waning years, poor eye sight, and a less than steady trigger finger might not be at the best advantage to harvest "a" deer like u described.

statistically speaking, of those that purchase a firearms lisc have about a 1 in 3 chance of harvesting "a" deer.

here is the percent success from 2005 to 2009 for minnesota firearms hunters...

34.3% 2005

37.3% 2006

37.1% 2007

35.1% 2008

32.1% 2009

i guess you could make the argument that he could archery hunt and have a better chance at harvesting an either sex deer.

but archery % success rate is between 24% and 17% for the past 5 years.

[mnbuckhunter]

I like everything you have to say except the last part.

I think that the best way for most of MN to get bigger bucks is that they should make it a law that everybody has to deer hunt in the county they live in.

That'd be a terrible idea! My deer camp isn't in the county I live in and my hunting party doesn't all live in the same county.

[kelly-p]

[quote name='matchseti think this "scenario" is sad' date=' and a true heart gripper. but i do not think it holds much merit in the topic of this discussion

[/quote']

This "scenario" as you call it happens to be some of my neighbors and one of my closest friends so it has merit to me. So AGAIN I ask the people that want APR across the state of MN and party hunting ended in MN. Would you feel that I was wrong to take him deer hunting with me on my private land or on his private land and help him harvest a young buck? I may be alone in this Topic feeling that compassion for someone that has deer hunted for over 65 years and is no longer able to hunt alone is more important then me getting a big buck.

mnbuckhunter,

That why I put the behind it. But that wouldn't be any more outlandish then me not being allowed to deer hunt my own land so the State might have bigger bucks.

[matchset]

kellyP

take him hunting! you both can sit in a box stand together, i have no argument against that.

lets not lose sight that we're talking about deer hunting; not deer shooting. i don't shoot a buck every year; but do go hunting again next year??? YES! its something that i love, but in don't need to shoot something everytime i go out.

if "shooting" is only what satisfies our appetites, then our perspective is skewed of what hunting is really about.

[gr8icefishinmind]

yep, if the only thing that satisfies you when you hunt is shooting something then you are missing out!!! Unfortunately ALOT of people think that all hunting is is going out and shooting a deer as quick as possible and in some cases shooting as many as possible!!

[mnbuckhunter]

mnbuckhunter,

That why I put the behind it. But that wouldn't be any more outlandish then me not being allowed to deer hunt my own land so the State might have bigger bucks.

Ah - gotcha. Sorry..... I'm trackin'. I lost the sarcasm in my reading.

[certified jumbo]

Wow. Just had time to read through this subject.

I don't want to get to deep into but wanted to share what we do. Lucky for us we own a decent amount of land. Lease a couple of farms adjacent to it. So we do have a large area (1,000 acres) to hunt. We (5 of us) have agreed not to shoot yearling bucks, but most of us will shoot two year olds. It has payed off big time for us. The last 3 years we've shot 142", 136", 125", 125", 115" and a handful of 100" 8 pts. We have lots of deer in that range on our trail cams as well. Our area 183 is not a monster buck area. But we've got a plan in place that works for us and we are happy shooting bucks that range from 100" plus.

I really don't have a major problem if people want to shoot whatever. We choose not to do that. But luckily we have enough land that I think we make a difference for our hunting situation.

[kelly-p]

He got to go hunting. His son was able to get through the storm the last weekend to get here to go with him. Getting up in a stand would have been to difficult for him but they had a wonderful day sitting in the woods sharing some time and memories of other hunts.

At times we all need to be reminded of how special deer hunting is even if we do not get a big buck.

[gr8icefishinmind]

At times we all need to be reminded of how special deer hunting is even if we do not get a big buck.

Or if we just don't get a deer in general, which is why you would pass up on a little buck!!

[Pinusbanksiana]

Jumbo, you seriously measure every buck you shoot? Thats the problem right there! Stop measuring the quality of your hunt in the inches of antler. That is not hunting its competition.

[Juneau4]

I go deer hunting to shoot a deer. Thats why its called deer hunting not deer watching. I can watch all the deer I want 51 other weeks in the year. Maybe I should have said the other 356 days of the year.