APR's good for hunter recruitment but not for retention?

[Getanet]

Exactly. It's about the hunt. That's what I said. All kinds of thrills from many different things. We choose hunting. I know it helps their food budget, but it's not the main reason they hunt. Like I said the dnr or venison donations or even neighbor would maybe give up some venison. We're all trophy hunting. Every deer is a trophy right?

Yes, every deer is a trophy. APRs fly in the face of that.

Are you telling me you'd prefer someone swallow their pride and go looking for charity with their head down and hand out, rather than shoot an otherwise perfectly healthy buck?

[surewood]

I don't remember saying at anytime that everyone is out for a trophy of large antlers.

[Big Dave2]

...Why do you want young deer to live another year? If your answer does not contain "larger antlers" you are lieing through your teeth....

[Big Dave2]

I don't remember saying at anytime that everyone is out for a trophy of large antlers.

Then there is no reason to support APR.

[surewood]

Getanet, that wasn't my point at all. Point is we don't hunt just for the meat. It's for the hunt whether we pull the trigger or not.

[96trigger]

Quote:

hunting pictures frequently showed groups of hunters with all the deer shot, buck, doe and fawn.

My point exactly, years ago it was about how many, now its about size, it is no different. Ever see many pictures of 10 guys standing in front of 1 small deer? Not very often....

I'm glad some people still do it the way they always have. I don't prosecute Amish people for still driving horses and buggies and going without electricity, but I sure as heck don't want to live that way. You can hunt however makes you happy, but the regulations are going to change, regardless of your ideals or my ideals. We are regulated on everything from vehicles, to fish, to deer. I understand that some of you are fundamentally against more regulations, that is fine. We are never going to agree.

You can talk about how its all about the kids, the history, the enjoyment, the meat, etc..., but let us know specifically, how this regulation will change your lifestyle of hunting. Will you quit taking your kids? Will the history go away? Do you have to quit using matches, compasses, and wool clothes? Do you enjoy being out in the woods less because you can't shoot a buck with under 4 points?

I don't get all the Wisconsin and Iowa comparisons, we are three very different states. Wisconsin hunts out of the peak of the rut, Iowa hunts out of the rut and doesn't have anywhere near the hunters.

The one thing we agree on is getting youth involved. I am constantly involved in getting youth excited about the outdoors. No matter if its shooting trap, catching panfish, or some kids 1st deer. Our goal should be to get them outside by all means possible and get them away from the TV and video games.

[Big Dave2]

Getanet, that wasn't my point at all. Point is we don't hunt just for the meat. It's for the hunt whether we pull the trigger or not.

That's YOUR view, not the view of every Minnesota deer hunter.

[surewood]

Why make everyone that enjoys larger antlers evil? Are we morally bad people cause of it? Do we not respect deer and hunting as much as others? Do we not get a say cause it's not your tradition? People make it sound like we're gonna destroy deer hunting. We have as much right to our opinions.

[96trigger]

Quote:

That's YOUR view, not the view of every Minnesota deer hunter.

No but its becoming the view of many, in some areas the majority, you can sit and argue about it until your blue in the face, its not going to change. You will obviously believe what you want, then cut and paste quotes to twist words around, you are very skilled at that. It will not change the outcome of what is coming for the STATE of Minnesota, yep, I said it, the state of Minnesota, in areas that are managed or intensive. I know that this was successful in zone 3, I know that others are going to see it. I know hunter satisfaction is up. I know when that gets out, there will be other areas in the state that want to try it.

[surewood]

Agreed Dave. You are a rare individual in that aspect I believe. I won't cut on you for what you want or what you believe cause it's different then some of my ideals. I do many of the same things as you. I just have other ways of going about it.

[surewood]

Wondering when you'd chime in trigger. Alot of heat on me today.

[TruthWalleyes]

I know that this was successful in zone 3

How do you know this.

[picksbigwagon]

My tune has changed on the whole idea of changing MN hunting regs: I am still on the fence about APR's, I used to be against them, I am on the fence now. I see both sides of the argument and it is what keeps getting rehashed here every couple of months.

We don't know what the age structure of the herd is because the state doesn't track that and I am not sure if they can even track it. MN has over a half a million people out deer hunting, I am not even sure if Iowa has 100K deer hunters. When stats like 80% are thrown out there, I question where the numbers come from.

If you want to protect the bucks, move the season out of the rut.

Some of you are arguing points and splitting hairs, APR is not gonna change at this point, I don't see it expanding and truthfully, I haven't hunted in MN for a few years now, but I used to hunt in 346 and 349, and from the pictures I have seen, there are some big bucks being harvested this fall and I have to believe it is part because of the APR. Not sure how this makes the herd "healthier" though. Of course that part of the state has always had big bucks running around. Mostly because of the terrain.....

[Getanet]

I'm not so sure about that Picks. I certainly think there is a very active movement to push APRs state-wide, or at least expand it to more zones. I don't believe they are the majority, but they are definitely more organized, more vocal, and as the saying goes the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Many hunters, particularly up North, probably don't even realize they will need to defend the status quo.

It's fine that we all have opinions on these matters. I have a million opinions on things, but rarely do I think they should be used to change the way others do things.

If you get a survey from the DNR asking about these issues, let's not pretend you're simply giving your opinion. You're casting a vote.

Unless biologists say changes are needed, I vote to give the individual the choice of what is acceptable.

[PurpleFloyd]

Quote:

hunting pictures frequently showed groups of hunters with all the deer shot, buck, doe and fawn.

My point exactly, years ago it was about how many, now its about size, it is no different. Ever see many pictures of 10 guys standing in front of 1 small deer? Not very often....

Actually our group still does that every year. The deer are all in the picture as are all the hunters. We butcher the deer and they are all processed together and it all tastes the same. We generally keep the antlers no matter if it is a small buck or a really nice one.

And I have no intent of changing but if we do it won't be because we are told we have to.

[InTheNorthwoods]

My tune has changed on the whole idea of changing MN hunting regs: I am still on the fence about APR's, I used to be against them, I am on the fence now. I see both sides of the argument and it is what keeps getting rehashed here every couple of months.

We don't know what the age structure of the herd is because the state doesn't track that and I am not sure if they can even track it. MN has over a half a million people out deer hunting, I am not even sure if Iowa has 100K deer hunters. When stats like 80% are thrown out there, I question where the numbers come from.

If you want to protect the bucks, move the season out of the rut.

Some of you are arguing points and splitting hairs, APR is not gonna change at this point, I don't see it expanding and truthfully, I haven't hunted in MN for a few years now, but I used to hunt in 346 and 349, and from the pictures I have seen, there are some big bucks being harvested this fall and I have to believe it is part because of the APR. Not sure how this makes the herd "healthier" though. Of course that part of the state has always had big bucks running around. Mostly because of the terrain.....

Herd health improves when you have a balanced age structure as the mature/dominant deer do a larger share of the breeding. A balanced age structure leads to a better hunting experience as you have a more competitive breeding structure as the competition brings added movement, more seeking for willing does, etc. APR's are an attempt to promote young buck survival enough to give them a chance to grow and recruit into the group of mature bucks that would be the primary breeders in a balanced herd.

For me, the best hunting I've experienced has always been in areas where there is a more balanced herd (bucks v. does), as there has been daytime rutting behavior, chasing, grunting, fighting, etc. - much of this is due to the competition for available does.

That is the theory...

The argument itself between the two sides, I believe fundamentally, boils down to whether "the kill" or "the hunt" is more important on an individual basis (understanding that both are important to almost all hunters, but what side do the scales lean). Many folks who place more weight on actually taking a deer, are less likely to want the overall experience in the field to be improved - which I'd guess is based in part on the liklihood that they've never experienced some of the events I refer to in this post. I know it wasn't until I started bowhunting that I was able to experience some of these situations because of a limited effective range of the weapon. With a gun, you simply don't have the same experience afield when the average time from seeing a deer to shooting said deer is probably less than 10 seconds for most folks.

[96trigger]

Quote:

How do you know this.

I'm sorry that I don't have data to back this up, that's all you seem to want. I guess you are part of the data driven society. The DNR will collect the data when they poll hunter satisfaction. So, why am I so confident? I live in the middle of zone 3, I have all my life, I work with the public on a daily basis. I talk deer hunting to everyone because everyone around here deer hunts. When an overwhelming majority of people talk about being in favor of APR's, or talk about how they were against it but are now all for it, you tend to get an idea that that hunter satisfaction is going to go up and that APR is going to stay.

I don't condemn anyone for being against it, I don't want to start arguments and generally, those that are against, are fundamentally against it and there will never be a compromise. However, if they are for it, I do let them know that the survey is coming out and if they get one, they better be sure to respond and let the DNR know what they think of APR.

[TruthWalleyes]

I am a data driven person. Comes from logical thinking.

The last 5 years i have hunted both firearms and muzzy season in z3. But, i apply for a lottery doe tag in a lottery zone, so i am never "Tied" to z3 for any kind of a survey. So there's 1 less vote for no apr. This year though, i applied for the lottery doe with my firearms, and didn't purchase a muzzy license until last week. I made sure to put down zone 347 so i am offered the chance to voice my opinion this year.

I think it is great that there is a survey coming out. I wish they would survey everyone in the state with a tag, and not just those that purchase their license and specify a zone in z3. I couldn't believe i've never received one of these surveys even though i've tagged dear each year in z3.

It would not be fair to make changes statewide based on the survey results in z3. That's a much differnet landscape than the flatlands i hunt in SW MN. Hopefully those groups have their chance to voice their opinion as well.

[hockeybc69]

There were hearings held in permit area 240 and 241 the same time Zone 3 was being considered.

I dont know this for a fact, but I really really doubt they would expand the APR without further widespread hearings and surveys.

[Big Dave2]

Why make everyone that enjoys larger antlers evil? Are we morally bad people cause of it? Do we not respect deer and hunting as much as others? Do we not get a say cause it's not your tradition? People make it sound like we're gonna destroy deer hunting. We have as much right to our opinions.

I don't think horn hunters are evil and I believe that you have as much right to your opinion as I do but what gives you the right to force your attitude and ways onto the rest of us? The way it was going in zone 3 seemed to work out quite nice for most people involved. If you want a large antlered animal then by all means put in the time, work and effort to hunt down a large antlered deer. Those who just want some meat for the freezer could also shoot the deer of their choice instead of passing on perfectly tasty animals just so their antlers can grow larger so folks like you can get what you want.

Seems to me like it was working just fine the way it was, I'm not sure why you feel the need to force your views on me.

[slimngrizzly]

I don't think horn hunters are evil and I believe that you have as much right to your opinion as I do but what gives you the right to force your attitude and ways onto the rest of us? The way it was going in zone 3 seemed to work out quite nice for most people involved. If you want a large antlered animal then by all means put in the time, work and effort to hunt down a large antlered deer. Those who just want some meat for the freezer could also shoot the deer of their choice instead of passing on perfectly tasty animals just so their antlers can grow larger so folks like you can get what you want.

Seems to me like it was working just fine the way it was, I'm not sure why you feel the need to force your views on me.

I guess this is where it gets me.... because im a "horn hunter", I can pass baby buck after baby buck... and it DOESN'T affect your hunt. But when you are on the other side of the fence killing every one of them because you are the "meat hunter" who is legaly party hunting... now YOU ARE affecting my hunt and ultimately the likelyhood of my future success. Now I can say im the victim!

What im saying is... currently, I CAN NOT prevent you from legally shooting all the little deer you want. However, YOU CAN prevent me from seeing mature deer because of your actions. So currently, the "horn hunters" are forced to be satisfied with the "meat hunters leftovers", so to speak. So your views are being forced on me!

i think there are more ways than just APR's to balance this... but APR's is one way!

[tfran123]

Very delicate subject, quite frankly I support APR (not for seniors or those under 18 however) and think it should be implemented statewide.

Hunters go through a maturity process over time, and after taking a number of deer one tends to want to raise the bar, same in most sports, fishing included. How many forkers does one need to put down before they yern for something a bit bigger. This isn't the pioneer days and most of us will make it through the year without venison if we fail to take a deer.

I also hate the timing of the MN gun season, peak rut. Want to know why Iowa and WI to a lesser extent harvest more mature deer? They aren't pounding as many 1.5 year olds when the ruts at the peak and those little guys are out cruising.

Why do guys go to Canada to shoot deer? It's not to take small ones. Same reason I would book a trip to Ontario to fish Northerns, I want larger fish.

[tfran123]

My final point . . .

Hunting to me is a family thing, it's more than just the kill, no doubt about that. But at the end of the day what makes the thrill of the hunt so much more exciting is when someone starts out talking about a big 10 pointer they shot, etc. Rarely are those most sacred stories about the big spike buck one shot. Not to belittle those who take small bucks, believe me I've been there. But harvesting that big buck or catching that 50" muskie, etc. is what really gets the blood going. And when the general public keeps stacking up 1.5 year olds the odds are not in your favor long term . . .

Just one persons perspective, nothing more.

[B. Amish]

someone needs to explain why a balanced age structure means a healthier deer herd. i'd buy that a balanced sex ratio can make a herd healthier. but, let's see something about this famed balanced age structure.

[Big Dave2]

I guess this is where it gets me.... because im a "horn hunter", I can pass baby buck after baby buck... and it DOESN'T affect your hunt. But when you are on the other side of the fence killing every one of them because you are the "meat hunter" who is legaly party hunting... now YOU ARE affecting my hunt and ultimately the likelyhood of my future success. Now I can say im the victim!

What im saying is... currently, I CAN NOT prevent you from legally shooting all the little deer you want. However, YOU CAN prevent me from seeing mature deer because of your actions. So currently, the "horn hunters" are forced to be satisfied with the "meat hunters leftovers", so to speak. So your views are being forced on me!

i think there are more ways than just APR's to balance this... but APR's is one way!

I disagree. There are plenty of these larger bucks around, you just have to go out and find them. They are not lurking behind every tree.