Stratosman Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I think that too many people watch too much outdoor channel... We as deer hunters are out own worst enemy. My fear is that MN becomes more like Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, ect... More big money buying up more and more land diplacing hunters to already overcrowded public land, all in the name of big antlers. Driving up the cost of land pushing it way past the point of the average Joe being able to afford. Out of state people leasing land driving more hunters out of private lands. Talk to hunters from big buck states and bick buck counties and you will hear of lots of hunting opportunities lost. It makes me fearful and somewhat sad to watch what deer hunting is becoming. My fear is that I will not be able to introduce my children to the joys of the sport simply because I will no longer have access to private land. I hunt some awesome land in zone three and would APR's improve the number and quality of mature deer? Probably, but at what cost? Maybe I am blind to what APR benifits are, but I think looking at the big picture it might cost us more than we are willing to wager.I love chasing and killing mature deer and will continue to do so, I guess you could call me a "horn hunter", almost a swear word on theses threads by some people, lol...and I am here to tell ya all, I don't fully support APR's simply for the fact that they could damage the tradition that is deer hunting for the sake of hunting deer, and not just for the pursuit of large antlers.So here is my label... horn porn hunter but not fully supportive of APR. Am I a hypocrite or an i.diot? You tell me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dave2 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I get the part about big brother telling us what to do, I hate that more than you realize but they tell us what we can shoot w/other animals and similar things happen in the world of fisheries. And in the end we need to manage our resources and sometimes rules are necessary to reach the end goal. It seems to me that every other managed game animal I can think of are managed for quantity not quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeybc69 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Quote:It seems to me that every other managed game animal I can think of are managed for quantity not quality. Well I am guessing bigger pheasants arent really impressive to most.But bigger grouse,,,,, now we are talking!! They do get bigger, dont they?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22lex Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Speaking of Outdoor News... From the Nov 29th issue: Zone 3 a bright spot in 2012 deer hunt http://www.outdoornews.com/November-2012/Zone-3-a-bright-spot-in-2012-deer-hunt/ Darn APR's!!!! And let the spins begin. What spins, there isn't any. A bunch of people that don't hunt here state APR doesn't work and it's against Minnesota tradition. Many hunters down here know it does work towards what we would consider a more equitable hunt in our own opinions (what seems to be the majority) and it has seemed to be gaining alot of support. I won't fluff it up, zone 3 hunters got sick of seeing forkhorns stacked in the back of trucks like cord-wood because of cross-tagging, those same slob hunters (you know those guys whose wives and uncles always bought tags but didn't own a gun) always complained about not seeing any "big bucks". APR in zone 3 point blank is about mature bucks, and sparing the dumbest critter in the woods during rut for one more year. If anyone hasn't figured out what critter that is it's the 1.5 year old buck. If you don't like APR, don't hunt in Zone 3, or just plan on tagging two does like the rest of the zone 3 meat hunters do. It's a pretty simple decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonteepical Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 page 25 grand total bucks harvested 2011 is 105,931. so if you agree on estimated 333,000 buck population and the population stays stable we kill them (bucks) off/turn over every 3 years. if you do that year after year(like we do) it's inevitable that you will have a young deer population and the majority of bucks being killed are yearlings.http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/recreation/hunting/deer/2011_harvestreport.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfran123 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Wrong answer unless you want to keep us on bunnies, pheasants and ducks. Go out west my friend and you'll find many areas within States having minimum 4 or 5 pt rules for elk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96trigger Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Purplefloyd, you must be a politician. I've read the article a couple times, what your saying about age structure is a stretch. It should not take a rocket scientist to understand that for a buck to get to be the apex or alpha buck, it needs to live survive its 1st year and half in the woods. I have never seen one reach maturity and become the alpha cut up in someones freezer.You are correct on habitat and nutrition, but the state doesn't have to do this. In many areas of the state, not all, but many, we already have more than enough nutrition and habitat for the given population. I concede that some areas probably lack both, but there is a much larger portion of the state that has both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleFloyd Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 page 25 grand total bucks harvested 2011 is 105,931. so if you agree on estimated 333,000 buck population and the population stays stable we kill them (bucks) off/turn over every 3 years. if you do that year after year(like we do) it's inevitable that you will have a young deer population and the majority of bucks being killed are yearlings.http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/recreation/hunting/deer/2011_harvestreport.pdf If you include the male fawns with the mature bucks then I would put the population higher than 1/3 of the total population. If you are including male fawns in the numbers then I would put the male deer population at closer to 450,000 since studies show there are more male fawns born than female fawns. However, I am interested in population data and if you have any good hard reports about the gender and age makeup of the total population of deer in the state I would love to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleFloyd Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Purplefloyd, you must be a politician. I've read the article a couple times, what your saying about age structure is a stretch. It should not take a rocket scientist to understand that for a buck to get to be the apex or alpha buck, it needs to live survive its 1st year and half in the woods. I have never seen one reach maturity and become the alpha cut up in someones freezer. I don't disagree with you but I would say if you accuse me of stretching the truth, if you are asserting that every 1.5 YO male deer is shot then I would say you are stretching much much farther. And if it does survive it's first 1.5 years but then comes by you at 2.5 and you shoot it then it still doesn't reach maturity and to me that is where the solution lies. If you honestly want to have the biggest bucks breeding the does and if you really want the herd 'balanced" then look at how things go in nature when we are not involved and you will see the youngest and the sick are the first things taken out of the herd and then they start at the next smallest while the most fit are generally the last to be taken. If we use that model to get to a balanced herd then we should be harvesting the younger deer and leaving the older mature bucks and does to breed and pass down the genetics.If your only beef is you want your neighbor to resist shooting a 1.5 year old buck so you can shoot it at 2.5 next year I can understand and respect what you want and why you want it, but then biology and herd health are not justifications for asking for the right to do it. It is then a personal choice issue and if that is what it is, be honest and present it that way.( not you specifically but APR proponents in general) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfran123 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 22 lex - read that one also.Let me define my experience in Southern MN:One particular farm which has great potential has a group of 12 firearms hunters that come in every year to drive (they do this for two days on about 700 acres). For the last 5 years they've got all their deer and shooting a doe is beneath them. First couple years they would get some dandy bucks, now it's almost exclusively forks and spikes. And now they complain that there aren't any nice deer to shoot as they have fond memories of some of the big 8's and 10's they used to shoot. What's wrong with this you say? It's happening all over folks and in many areas these groups could take a few does. Don't tell me there are plenty buck fawns, what good will that do when they get culled the following year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dave2 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Wrong answer unless you want to keep us on bunnies, pheasants and ducks. Go out west my friend and you'll find many areas within States having minimum 4 or 5 pt rules for elk. When it is said that other states manage to grow these large antlered animals that you seek without implementing APRs we are told that we should not compare Minnesota to other states?BTW, whats wrong with bunnies, pheasants and ducks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dave2 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Well I am guessing bigger pheasants arent really impressive to most.But bigger grouse,,,,, now we are talking!! They do get bigger, dont they?? That's the difference between you and me. ANY game animal taken is impressive to me, not just the big ones that I can brag about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22lex Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Yeah, that was a common sight in zone 3 for many years, with the exception that when they did the deer drives, (witnessed many) hordes of does would come out with a couple forkies trailing them (of course the mature bucks bail out before getting to the posters) and instead of taking the mature does for meat the small bucks were targeted.No-one down here believes they are owed a trophy buck every year without a lot of effort, time in the woods, and alot of luck, but we do know the law of averages and that if X amount of 1.5 year old bucks are not shot, then Y amount of these will make it to age 2.5 by dumb luck thus making the hunt in zone 3 for mature der alot more equitable.Easy decision, stay out of zone 3 if you don't like it. If you want meat there are plenty of does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfran123 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Now other States are off limits? Good grief, go ahead and change the rules on the fly. Tell me which MN big game animal I should compare deer to? Elk/Moose? Hardly a large enough population to make the the case. You asked for an example and I gave you a perfect one. Fish, while not animals are very similar if you think about it (how they are managed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfran123 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Yeah, that was a common sight in zone 3 for many years, with the exception that when they did the deer drives, (witnessed many) hordes of does would come out with a couple forkies trailing them (of course the mature bucks bail out before getting to the posters) and instead of taking the mature does for meat the small bucks were targeted.No-one down here believes they are owed a trophy buck every year without a lot of effort, time in the woods, and alot of luck, but we do know the law of averages and that if X amount of 1.5 year old bucks are not shot, then Y amount of these will make it to age 2.5 by dumb luck thus making the hunt in zone 3 for mature der alot more equitable.Easy decision, stay out of zone 3 if you don't like it. If you want meat there are plenty of does. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96trigger Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Quote:I don't disagree with you but I would say if you accuse me of stretching the truth, if you are asserting that every 1.5 YO male deer is shot then I would say you are stretching much much farther. And if it does survive it's first 1.5 years but then comes by you at 2.5 and you shoot it then it still doesn't reach maturity and to me that is where the solution lies.Not every 1.5 year old is shot, if that were the case, then there would be no bucks, period, right? What we probably should say is that too many are getting shot. A lot of the shooting a 1.5 vs 2.5 year old argument comes from the fact that the 1.5 year old buck is the easiest deer in the woods to kill. They come in readily to calls, seem to have no fear, and are often alone and cruising during daylight hours. Many times, they are the first deer someone sees. A 2.5 year old buck is a much different adversary than the fork or basket 1.5 year old. APR results in more 2.5 year old bucks making it to 3.5, then some of those 3.5 year olds make it to 4.5, etc.... It does lead to an increase in age structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LandDr Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Why is a high doe to buck ratio bad for the heard or APRs? 6:1 for example?Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flipper Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Yeah, that was a common sight in zone 3 for many years, with the exception that when they did the deer drives, (witnessed many) hordes of does would come out with a couple forkies trailing them (of course the mature bucks bail out before getting to the posters) and instead of taking the mature does for meat the small bucks were targeted.No-one down here believes they are owed a trophy buck every year without a lot of effort, time in the woods, and alot of luck, but we do know the law of averages and that if X amount of 1.5 year old bucks are not shot, then Y amount of these will make it to age 2.5 by dumb luck thus making the hunt in zone 3 for mature der alot more equitable.Easy decision, stay out of zone 3 if you don't like it. If you want meat there are plenty of does. Maybe those who want to change the regulations statewide should just stay out of the state. Easy decision. JFYI, Not everyone who is against APRs shoots every young buck they see or has a goal of filling their freezer. I haven't shot anything but does for over 15 years and I am selective on does as well. Those who want to change hunting to an elitist sport have been watching too much TV IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monstermoose78 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I am against APR'S because people will just shoot the 2.5 year old bucks instead of the 1.5 year old deer. They still don't make it to 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, or older. I think the best thing is to educate hunters about harvesting more does and be picky about it look for out button bucks. I know that I have gotten my hunting group to let the little bucks walk and they have been doing it. Some of them want deer to eat so they shoot does. expect this year they did not see a doe or a buck until the 6th day of the hunt and it happened to be a 6 pointer that walked out in front of my uncle who wanted a deer to eat. He told my dad he wanted a doe to come out but he had to go home the next day. To me its ok because it was his choice and he thought about about letting the 6 pointer walk, but shot it knowing he wanted to have some deer to eat. I hunt in the arrowhead and wolves take the weak deer which is young,sick, and old.The fishing example is great guys. Look at Mille Lacs Lake hmm where are the little walleyes. In time there will not be any big ones left because we harvest all the small ones before they get to a breeding age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22lex Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 [Maybe those who want to change the regulations statewide should just stay out of the state. Easy decision. JFYI, Not everyone who is against APRs shoots every young buck they see or has a goal of filling their freezer. I haven't shot anything but does for over 15 years and I am selective on does as well. Those who want to change hunting to an elitist sport have been watching too much TV IMO. IMO I don't care if it goes statewide, works for zone 3, you want to shoot whatever walks because you don't want big brothers boot on your throat don't hunt in zone three. Please don't passive-agressively complain about it on a HSOforum because it makes you feel better 'cause you didn't fill your tag when you visited for a brief period. If you don't like APR, don't let it spread to your zone, but don't pretend to know how good/bad it is in zone 3.For the record I do not see this as an elitist sport. I shot my first buck in 5 years this year, years past I have taken 2 does a season as the rules/time would allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96trigger Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Quote:I am against APR'S because people will just shoot the 2.5 year old bucks instead of the 1.5 year old deer. They still don't make it to 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, or older. I could not disagree with this statement more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monstermoose78 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 It will start at 4 points a side, then the horn porn guys will push for it to be 5, then 6, then 7, and so on. Where does that get us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22lex Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 It will start at 4 points a side, then the horn porn guys will push for it to be 5, then 6, then 7, and so on. Where does that get us? What state has this happened in?No one in Zone 3 is calling for 5/6/7 per side as future rules.....currently it gets us a greater appreciation for living in this zone according to word of mouth by hunters in Zone 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monstermoose78 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Just wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfran123 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Just wait No logic in your thinking, sorry won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts