40% of MN deer hunters refuse to shoot an antlerless deer

[Bowfin]

My whole family eats venison which makes shooting any deer the goal each year. Three or four deer in the freezer for my family of 4 is about right each year. Yes, its nice to go after the big buck but these days when I see an antlerless deer I see back-straps, steaks and hamburger walking by. Putting a few deer in the freezer each year means $$ and food in the freezer to me. Having taken 30+ deer over the years I am always happy to take a nice doe opening morning if given the chance. I'll take the spike to - I've kept every set of antlers I've ever shot spike to 10 pointer on plaques - memories are still nice no matter how big the rack. Late in the week or during muzzy season fawns are fair game for me too.

Unfortunately, I know quite a few hunters who don't or rather not eat deer. Butchering them are an inconvenience for them. I also think the fact that some of their wives don't like it disuades them from eating their kill. I think this fact plays into the numbers why many are letting antlerless walk. Its more about antlers than the meat for many - unfortunately.

Here's a question - How many deer hunters eat up all the venison they shoot every year?

[Powerstroke]

Without reading all the previous posts I will offer this observation, Most of the people I know who are buck-only hunters are far from antlermaniacs. These are the people who grew up during a system of bucks only and would rather shoot a spike buck then take a nice doe.

I really with people wouldn't jump to the antler-mania argument when surveys like this come out because generally speaking, those who are trophy deer hunters will be the ones passing on young bucks.

So the question should be why would you shoot a spike buck over a doe? Those results would be far more interesting then the ones presented in this article.

I don't know many people who wouldn't want to shoot a large buck, however the large percentage of hunters that I come across would brag loudly about the fork or 6pt basket rack rather than the large doe in the bed of their truck.

[BobT]

Without reading all the previous posts I will offer this observation, Most of the people I know who are buck-only hunters are far from antlermaniacs. These are the people who grew up during a system of bucks only and would rather shoot a spike buck then take a nice doe.

I really with people wouldn't jump to the antler-mania argument when surveys like this come out because generally speaking, those who are trophy deer hunters will be the ones passing on young bucks.

So the question should be why would you shoot a spike buck over a doe? Those results would be far more interesting then the ones presented in this article.

I don't know many people who wouldn't want to shoot a large buck, however the large percentage of hunters that I come across would brag loudly about the fork or 6pt basket rack rather than the large doe in the bed of their truck.

I probably fall into that group but I really don't know why I would take a spike buck over a doe. I've never really given it much thought before. That's a good question. I grew up hunting during the dry years of the 70's and 80's but to be honest I don't think that is what influences my choice.

I will say that I enjoy eating venison but just harvesting any deer to put meat in my freezer is not my main goal. What I mean is that I won't just shoot the first deer that crosses my path. If I have a doe and a spike buck standing in front of me and I've decided to take one, chances are I will take the buck. I think my best answer to this question is that a single buck can produce multiple fawns each year but a single doe will only produce one or two fawns each year. Taking the doe can have a more dramatic impact on the future survival of the species in terms of numbers.

[Powerstroke]

A buck cannot produce fawns, and it only takes one buck of any size to fertilize several does so that argument is flawed. However killing too many does can be detrimental. If a proper balance is obtained then equal hunting of bucks and does will be fine.

Several studies have shown that a single doe in good habitat will create a family of 60 deer over the course of 5 years if you count the offspring of the different generations. It does not take tons of deer to make more deer. However a healthy balance of bucks to does and quality habitat will determine how well the deer survive.

I certainly don't want to start the QDMA argument again, but your response Bob shows that you do have the mentality of the buck is better from that 70's-90's hunting philosophy of MN.

Unfortunately MN went a little overboard with their extension of the Intensive harvest hunts its sort of soured people on shooting antlerless deer. The state should focus more on herd health.

[JimmyJames]

I hunt in an are where wolves and poor management by the dnr has brought the numbers down so much, that I won't shoot a doe.I hold out for a mature buck every year, but if it came down to it and I really wanted a deer . I would shoot the spike, but probably not.But if one had to end up dead I would pick the little buck every time. It's gonna be a while before I shoot another doe near my cabin.

[BobT]

A buck cannot produce fawns, and it only takes one buck of any size to fertilize several does so that argument is flawed.

What are you talking about? Maybe a lesson in sexual education is required. One buck can produce more fawns than one doe any day. Put it this way.

Place one buck in a pen with 12 does and see how many fawns he produces in the next year.

Now lets reverse the situation and place one doe in the same pen with 12 bucks and see how many fawns she produces in the same time frame.

[Mcfin]

I love to deer hunt and I actually like to butcher them.I even mount all the antlers myself. I fill my freezer but my kids come over and raid it and take all my venison.

[Spike76]

I've shot more spikes then anything but I like shooting fawns and does also. Deer meat is really better from the fawns but I like eating it all. Maybe the DNR should have an experiment of not shooting 8 or 10 pointers so there would be more 12 pointers. I would really like to shoot a 12 pointer.

[heat checker]

Last I checked, neither one, by themself, can produce a fawn. Both Bob and PStroke are right, they are just wording it different. I think the mentality of taking a buck over a doe comes from the "dry years". Think about how you would react if the DNR told you to go ahead and shoot hen pheasants. You've grown up looking for the male colors before you shoot, and now the DNR tells you to shoot the hens also? I gaurantee if the two flush together, you would pick out the rooster and shoot him every time.

[Powerstroke]

Even that argument is flawed Bob, but I'll let you have your way. You can prove your point with "the pen" but I don't hunt in a pen.

As far as spike asking for more 12pt'rs, some deer will never bee a 12pt no matter ow long they live. Its just their genetics. Look at the "record 8pt" that was poached last year near cannon falls. That deer was never gonna be a 12 pt no matter how long it lived unless it developed a bunch of non-typical features and I think you're talking about a typical 12 anyway.

Secondly and probably most-important, if you want to shoot a 12pt then you can't shoot spikes. No deer is born with 8 or 10 pts. It takes 2-3yrs to get there. It requires good nutrition, good genetics and time.

People don't get me wrong. You can shoot whatever you want to shoot. I will not preach to you. However, if you say you want to see bigger bucks, there is a recipe for that and it doesn't involves shooting spike bucks and basket racks.

[Powerstroke]

Heatchecker, I completely agree with your pheasant comparison. It is something that gets me every time I hunt with a buddy at the game farm. It simply requires a change in thinking.

[BobT]

Quote:

Even that argument is flawed Bob, but I'll let you have your way. You can prove your point with "the pen" but I don't hunt in a pen.

Here's the problem. You appear to be insistent upon turning this into a QDM or PR (point restriction) debate and in the process you've taken my comments out of context. Let's revisit what I wrote and pay attention to the bold print.

Quote:

I think my best answer to this question is that a single buck can produce multiple fawns each year but a single doe will only produce one or two fawns each year. Taking the doe can have a more dramatic impact on the future survival of the species in terms of numbers.

You do hunt in a pen, it's the same pen I hunt in, and the fence is the Atlantic, Arctic, and Pacific. It's just a very large pen and biology works the same way as it did in my analogy. In our pen the does can still only produce one or two fawns per year whereas a buck can produce many more. Show me how that is not true. Take a drive to a neighboring beef farm and talk to the farmer. Does he have more cows or bulls? Why does he castrate the young bulls and sell them for butcher and keep the heifers? We don't need a lot of bucks to maintain the population of the species but we do need a lot of does to maintain the population of the species and this is the reason I believe I tend to take the spike buck before the doe. QDM has nothing to do with this discussion and is not part of the equation for MY answer to the OP's original question. This thread is not about wanting to see bigger bucks. It's about the question of, "why we tend to take bucks before does."

[Powerstroke]

Yikes, well when shooting a doe in your large pen constitutes "a more dramatic impact on the future survival of the species in terms of numbers" then I think we are beyond saving the whitetail deer.

I am not a QDM or APR guy. You'll find I've never advocated it and stay away from the discussion. In fact the only comment I made was back to spike76.

I merely mentioned my observations in response to the article posted and you responded to me. I wasn't talking about anyone here but you felt like you needed to comment on it.

[matchset]

back on topic... he states that the antlerless harvest was up 60-70%...

Cornicelli says, "We know that most hunters only take one deer, even when they had to take a doe first, [hunters] just don't tend to take more than a single deer,"

yet, he states that 40% REFUSE to harvest a doe....

They focused their study on state parks where hunters had to apply for a special permit and could be easily identified and surveyed.

maybe this is the opinion of SPECIAL permit holders...not the general hunting community!

also, in science a survey or statistic is only as good as the sample size...

if this was survey took place in state run special hunts in parks and reserves... how many tag are realistically given out in a year???

i added it up...1839 tags for special hunts in the 2010 reg book... and with firearm licenses in 2010 totaling 595,263 and another 102,371 for archery and 55,640 for muzzleloader....

i do not see how a sample size of less than 2,000 hunters can really sum up the OPINION or REFUSAL to harvest antlerless deer in minnesota when there were 753,274 hunters last year!

[BobT]

I am not a QDM or APR guy. You'll find I've never advocated it and stay away from the discussion. In fact the only comment I made was back to spike76.

I merely mentioned my observations in response to the article posted and you responded to me. I wasn't talking about anyone here but you felt like you needed to comment on it.

[Spike76]

Hey Powerstroke, I was joking on the 12 pointers. I really think less rules and regulations would be better. I don't like passing up any deer. My son just traded my powerstroke in,so now I'm stuck with a Dodge magnum, but I agree with you. The first deer I shot with a bow, was a nice doe, and I got a trophy for it, from Mr. Outdoors. They said every deer was a trophy, and that is my feeling too. Deer hunting is my biggest enjoyment in life, besides bugging my beautiful wife of 45 years.

[TruthWalleyes]

You make some good points Bob, and to be honest...I've never looked at it that way.

[LightningBG]

If I have a doe and a spike buck standing in front of me and I've decided to take one, chances are I will take the buck. I think my best answer to this question is that a single buck can produce multiple fawns each year but a single doe will only produce one or two fawns each year. Taking the doe can have a more dramatic impact on the future survival of the species in terms of numbers.

Yeah, you guys are saying the same thing, only backwards wording.

A single buck can produce multiple offspring per year. YES. That is why they are less valuable to a growing herd. Because there is some other buck that will take the place of the downed buck with great joy.

With that being said. I'll take anything.

And I dont believe in the argument that if you want to shoot a 12pt buck, you need to let the spikes go. If that argument was to hold up, you have to let every other buck under 12pt go too. If I have the option of taking a spike or a 8pt, but my ultimate goal is to get a 12. I'll shoot the spike, with the hopes that the 8 will become a 12 some day. Forget passing on the spike.

[LightningBG]

Place one buck in a pen with 12 does and see how many fawns he produces in the next year.

Now lets reverse the situation and place one doe in the same pen with 12 bucks and see how many fawns she produces in the same time frame.

By saying they are higher producers, you're actually saying they are less valuable, since less are needed for breeding.

(Most of the time high producers are considered the most valuable, which is where everyone was getting messed up (or at least I was))

[reinhard1]

i will take what the law allows. i am not a trophy hunter. i happen to like venison. i have seen but never shot a "trophy" buck. would of shot it had i gotten a clean shot at it. before i pull the trigger i have to feel comfortable that that shot will give the deer a swift death.

i dont know how accurate that poll is with the 40% percent number. if someone doesn't want to kill a doe that is fine with me. if someone only will shoot a trophy, thats fine also. i want meat for the freezer and sausage, and the joy of just being out there. heck, a lot of times where i hunt [the joy of being out there] is all i get. i dont shoot fawns, that's one thing i wont do. just me. good luck.

[Bear55]

Why don't we just say every time you shoot a spike there is a 100% chance that deer will never turn into a 12. You also slightly decreased your odds of shooting a 12 because there is one less buck around that has the potential of becoming a 12. Now if the genes in your hunting area only producing 10 pointers well then you are in trouble if you only want a 12.

[lungdeflator]

First of all you only need about 30 people from a population to get an accurate representation of what that population thinks. height, weight, shoe size, antlerless preference whatever.

Where these surveys taken this last year when alot of areas where lottery and people only had one tag?

If so could this be based on people wanting their one tag to go to a buck?

[lakevet]

I don't know the exact ins and outs of the survey, but it is being used by the DNR when they are making decisions about regulations and predicting hunter behavior. In my corner of the world, if 40% was anywhere near accurate, it represents a gigantic shift into a new deer hunter mentality that historically has never existed before in such large numbers. In the not so distant past, the doe permit was a very highly prized item for almost everyone. Everyone would watch for the mailman, then rush to the mailbox to see if you got one.

Read some articles about first time deer hunters out east in suburbia where they are over run by deer. These urban/suburban,never picked up a gun before, carbon neutral, save the earth, save the wolves, save a tree types are getting into deer hunting because it is a source of locally grown, healthy, renewable, humane free range, low carbon footprint food. It grinds their mental gears a bit as they are surrounded by the PETA mentality, but once they have hunted for their own food, they realize killing and eating a deer, including fawns, is morally and ethically solid ground and can look their neighbors in the eye and defend hunting for all of us. Then the neighbors mental gears start grinding as they have to rethink deer hunting and the fact that for the first time in 10 years the roses haven't all been eaten. And no trip to the body shop for the vehicle the past year.

Good, civil posts. Just wanted you to take a look in the mirror and ask yourself why do I do what I do. Is it because of peer pressure, media idolizing a type of deer, Dad taught me, etc? Am I shooting what I want, or what someone else is trying to convince me I need to shoot? And can I explain it in a civil discussion.

Maybe it's because the wife says no more stinking, tough, old, mature full blown in rut swamp bucks. Get the does and fawns that keeping eating my roses and the garden!

Don't tell her, but I enjoy shooting all of the above, and best of all is when the kids shoot them!

lakevet

[BobT]

It is funny how when given the choice I would more likely opt to take a buck but when I think about it, since I have admitted that I am more of a meat hunter than a trophy hunter then why would I make that choice? You would think I whould be leaning more toward a doe simply because the meat would be better. I'm confused.

[Jameson]

If all you are is a meat hunter, I think you are doing it right. That buck likely has more meat than the doe standing next to it. If you shoot the doe that will be less fawns next year, meat for the future. If you let that buck get old, the meat gets less tender.

Now if you are interested in managing the deer for goals other than meat, than you are no longer just a meat hunter, and moving toward being something else. Want to see deer grow to full size? Get their population in check with the habitat, balance out the sex ratio, and allow some to reach all ages.....