Has anyone ever wondered?

[deerminator]

What would happen if to improve deer #s that they closed doe hunting for a year or maybe two - statewide or just in those areas designated lottery and hunters choice? Maybe this is a question I should ask the DNR and likely will via an e-mail. But has it been explored and/or discussed on here? I wonder what the impact likely would be? A good population afterward? Too many deer for the public's liking? Too many bucks shot? I post this in the Archery - Bowhunting forum because I know many would like to take a doe early and then wait for a buck. I personally would be willing to take a year or two off doe hunting if it had lasting effects for years to come that were favorable to deer hunting overall.

[Jameson]

The sex ratio would be so screwed up. Let's just take a year or two off of deer hunting. It could have very positive lasting effects.

[leech~~]

There is a lot of data out there on this thinking. The DNR did do some of this in the late 70's. I think they are more in line with blance now.

[deerminator]

Ha! That's why I'm asking. To get opinions and insight. Or maybe the sex ratio would be off kilter for a year or two and then work its way back out once you could take does in the following year. Again, not advocating the state do this, nor close down deer hunting completely. Certainly not the latter. Just wondering what people thought.

[nofishfisherman]

I'm guessing it would push more people to take undersized bucks. Instead of letting small basket racks or fork bucks walk we'd see more people take them.

The next several years after we'd see alot of does and very few mature bucks.

I think after last years mild winter and some tighter restrictions in place for this year we may see at least a marginal uptick in deer population for the next year or two. Of course that could all change with another bad winter like we had 2 winters ago.

[reelguy]

Seems to me the DNR is trying to get the best all options. They are not closing deer hunting, they are restricting many more zones this year and have the antler point restrictions in the SE zone as well. The next step I could see would be a less restrictive antler restriction for the whole state (like 3 points on one side instead of 4) and lottery the heck out of most of the state for a year or two. An argument to that would be the confusion caused by more rules, with already confusing regulations at times. But then again when has the state ever made anything easy and clear cut? I think I could handle something like that for a year of two.

[Sturg]

I have been deerhunting since the mid 60's. We had property in northern MN. The season used to be later in Nov. and it was any deer. We had a couple of bad back to back winters and the deer population crashed. The DNR actually closed the season around 1970 or 1971. In the early to mid 70's they started on a different management scheme. They broke the season into segments and you had to choose a time period to hunt. The population slowly came back. They kept adjusting the management scheme over time. In the mid nineties we had another bout of two tough winters in a row. This time they kept the season opened and sharply curtailed the number of doe permits. The population rebounded quickly.

During the lean years of lottery doe permits are group would only get maybe 3 or 4 doe permits for 12 to 15 hunters. We worked together to harvest a deer. It wasn't about harvest it was about hunting and family generations sharing in the hunt or deer camp (tradition).

The last 10-12 years have been some of the highest harvests MN has experienced. I think the current management system is working well. It is flexible and the population rebounds fairly quickly when the weather cooperates. Yes we may have a few lean years now and then but overall hunting is good compared to the 70's and 80's.

[snapcrackpop]

I wish we would automatically get a buck and anterless permit AGAIN with our achery license. The DNR has said that the archery harvest is statistically insignificant. So why not let us?

I have also heard that more deer are killed by vehicles than by bowhunters.

I do not know if this info is factual, but it sounds right.

[mainbutter]

With the exception of enjoying seeing bigger racks walking through the woods (don't we all? Plus.. insert joke here), there isn't much I have to complain about with the deer I see where I hunt.

Haven't been hunting long, but I see plenty walking around. It'd be nice to see more big bucks, but closing antlerless hunting for a year won't change that. I've only ever seen one big buck (relative, probably "average" based on a lot of pictures on this site) on that property, as I was brewing my coffee on a crisp October morning he wandered past the window. I probably see a few dozen antlerless deer for every legal buck I can spot.

The population is fine up there from what I'm able to assess anecdotally, no need to cut antlerless hunting.

[TruthWalleyes]

What would happen if to improve deer #s that they closed doe hunting for a year or maybe two - statewide or just in those areas designated lottery and hunters choice? Maybe this is a question I should ask the DNR and likely will via an e-mail. But has it been explored and/or discussed on here? I wonder what the impact likely would be? A good population afterward? Too many deer for the public's liking? Too many bucks shot? I post this in the Archery - Bowhunting forum because I know many would like to take a doe early and then wait for a buck. I personally would be willing to take a year or two off doe hunting if it had lasting effects for years to come that were favorable to deer hunting overall.

Are you just talking quantity of deer?

Or,

Percieved quality of deer? (i.e. Horn Porn)?

I grew up in SW MN, where deer habitat is low, numbers are low, and it has been lottery for 20 years or so. You see young bucks because larger bucks are harvested; there are a few nice ones plucked each year for sure.

Young bucks are shot because deer #'s are not high (Meaning the likelihood of seeing a 6-8pt deer is low), and if you see a horn, and you aren't one of the lucky 100 people to score an anterless tag, you shoot the first horned animal you see.

So in this peticular area, doe harvest tags are very very minimal. In fact i think 2 years ago they gave out 25 anterless tags.

Numbers appear to be normal over the last many years.

Quality has not changed, mostly younger bucks and a large variety of does.

That is what you get with minimal deer habitat and the current harvest practices i guess.

I learned how to appreciate a deer for its meat and not for its horns growing up in this area.