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

[TruthWalleyes]

At what point will the pro APR guys be happy?

Will the anecdotal passion be good enough after current APR regs are in place? Will we need to go further and require more points, or other criteria to satify the pro APR group?

As said, I let them walk...But i measure my own happiness.

Those that support yet after 3 years...

Is the improvement you see "Percieved" or what measure are you using to quantify that there is success in the APR program?

[surewood]

Current apr regs would be fine. We're not looking for 180" deer everywhere. We want young deer to live another year or two not be slaughtered the first year of their life.

[TruthWalleyes]

Some years back I shot a 2.5 year old 7 that was 146, 2.5 8 that was 154. My deer last year was 219lbs. No clue of it's age. Taxidermist just said it was old. This year I figured my deer was 3.5 years and it weighed 190lbs. My 2010 buck I didn't weigh as it was in the 60's that day so we cut it up asap, but based on my other deer it had to be pushing 200lbs. It's my avatar pic. We hang off our scale to check accuracy and it's right on. Maybe I have poor judgment of age.

So what's wrong with the current regs? Your doing fine it seems?

I question you only to help understand what is driving your motivation given what appears to be success in past years.

[22lex]

Surveys will be the only data available, perception will be moot in this discussion as there is no valid data besides hunter approval or disgust in zone 3. It's not up to me, it's up to the collective on what they have experienced the last three years. In my circle of hunting friends who include a couple that were anti APR at one point, are now supportive of it.

Hunter surveys will be the only data collected to support/or boot APR.

[surewood]

My motivation isn't about my success. It's about the success of young deer living more then a year. It's about the quality of deer hunting we could offer the people living here not just me. We have a ton of potential in MN to offer it's residents quality deer statewide. I know "quality" is different to different people. My idea of quality is young deer surviving and maintaining a healthy herd. Hopefully those two go hand in hand.

[bigbucks]

I understand your point & choose to target older deer too, but again the older deer meaning a healthier herd just doesn't hold water. A buck, or a doe for that matter, passes on the same genes when it's a year-old as it does when it's ten.

My kids are three years apart, does my younger one have better genetics?

I realize they're my kids so they're already behind the 8 ball, but you get my point...

[slimngrizzly]

I think it should be against the law to kill a buck until hes 4 1/2 years old. Then you can just get rid of the APR's all together. Whichever side youre on, I think thats only fair to the deer.

Does the deer have any say? What if they dont want to be killed while theyre still on moms tit? What if the deer wants to have kids and be a grandpa? We could be civil enough to allow them that time before we kill them.

Id support that.

[bigbucks]

I think it should be against the law to kill a buck until hes 4 1/2 years old. Then you can just get rid of the APR's all together. Whichever side youre on, I think thats only fair to the deer.

Does the deer have any say? What if they dont want to be killed while theyre still on moms tit? What if the deer wants to have kids and be a grandpa? We could be civil enough to allow them that time before we kill them.

Id support that.

Do they carry an AARP card or perhaps an APR card when they're grandparents so we know they're okay to shoot?

[jay83196]

Slim....I can't tell if your serious or not if you are....really! "civil and let them be grandparents"? Wait until 4.5 years old, you gona come show us all how to age a deer 200yds away?

And make it fair to the deer..Better start using a knife or bow you make yourself, better yet chase em down and use bare hands, otherwise pretty sure shooting them from 200yds away isn't really fair. If they could talk on the tit or 4.5 years old, pretty sure they wouldn't want to die anytime! Those are some of the best ideas yet, WOW!

How's this, we leave it alone, or get rid if intensive harvest continue having wolf season things will be fine!

[jay83196]

Lol!

They get grey, wear glasses, and have to get up 2-3 times in the middle of night to wiz.

Were talking more humane, civil and fair....if those are your real reasons why does that only apply to bucks? It's ok to slaughter doe but wrong a buck? I haven't heard doe mentioned once, All about rack for you, who are some of you guys kidding...

[TruthWalleyes]

My motivation isn't about my success. It's about the success of young deer living more then a year. It's about the quality of deer hunting we could offer the people living here not just me. We have a ton of potential in MN to offer it's residents quality deer statewide. I know "quality" is different to different people. My idea of quality is young deer surviving and maintaining a healthy herd. Hopefully those two go hand in hand.

I like your statement. I agree with the sentiment. I would rather let education run it's course teaching qdm and have it take many years than force it on others without the data to support harvest of older deer or data that supports herd health.

Good discussion surewood.

[surewood]

Slim I didn't mean old deer created a healthy herd. I mean older age structure in addition to a healthy herd.

[leech~~]

I think it should be against the law to kill a buck until hes 4 1/2 years old. Then you can just get rid of the APR's all together. Whichever side youre on, I think thats only fair to the deer.

Does the deer have any say? What if they dont want to be killed while theyre still on moms tit? What if the deer wants to have kids and be a grandpa? We could be civil enough to allow them that time before we kill them.

Id support that.

Ok well maybe the next election we can vote on Deer's Rights as well!

[Boar]

I think we should all sit down together an listen to some lional ritchie music, listen to wat lionel has to say an then go icefishing.

[PropsterII]

There is absolutely no question that a better ratio of mature bucks makes for a "healthier" herd, and I'm not talking about sickness and disease, though that is a possibility as well. I'm talking about a better balance, a better buck:doe ratio. Less breeding by immature bucks. A more intense rut. Better age structure. Anybody who thinks shooting 80% immature bucks is a good thing and we should just leave well enough alone - you want to talk about selfish....

[certified jumbo]

i could be wrong, but i think a 1.5 year old buck is considered an adult. thus making it mature

[Spike76]

In the late 60's, I shot a #107 doe with the bow and got a trophy. I was taught than that all deer are trophies. I'm happy just to shoot any deer. I always save my horns and I've got many spikes. Remember, when you limit what a hunter can shoot, it could be his last hunt and you kept him from the treasured memory of taking a deer. At least 3 or 4 times through the years I've shot spikes and forks that I thought were does. Luckily we had buck tags.

[nonteepical]

a 1.5 year old is simply a yearling, not considered an adult in the real world, but we live in minnesota.

if you went by a herds age structure in minnesota you could maybe make that arguement but probobly 2.5 would be more accurate. in the real deer world with a balanced age structure i'd say 4.5 would be maturity.

[nonteepical]

At least 3 or 4 times through the years I've shot spikes and forks that I thought were does. Luckily we had buck tags.

scary. i could see maybe that happening once in a lifetime but 3-4 times, no wonder you don't want annyone to tell you what you can shoot. another reason for no cross tagging of bucks.

[TruthWalleyes]

DATA?

80% immature?

State wide?

Zone specific?

[hockeybc69]

this topic is getting comical...

[Big Dave2]

There is absolutely no question that a better ratio of mature bucks makes for a "healthier" herd, and I'm not talking about sickness and disease, though that is a possibility as well. I'm talking about a better balance, a better buck:doe ratio. Less breeding by immature bucks. A more intense rut. Better age structure. Anybody who thinks shooting 80% immature bucks is a good thing and we should just leave well enough alone - you want to talk about selfish....

I think there is plenty of question.........

[Big Dave2]

Current apr regs would be fine. We're not looking for 180" deer everywhere. We want young deer to live another year or two not be slaughtered the first year of their life.

You can keep using the word slaughter for more drama effect all you want but if all we had were 2 1/2 year old deer they would be getting "slaughtered" also. Every deer you have ever killed has been "slaughtered". 1 1/2 year old does get "slaughtered" every year.

Why do you want young deer to live another year? If your answer does not contain "larger antlers" you are lieing through your teeth. If these bucks did not have antlers we would not be having this discussion. No one cares if young does are shot, no one cares if young pheasants are shot, etc, etc.

What it comes down to is that the ruination of hunting will be the fact that the reason for hunting in the first place has changed so dramatically. It used to be that people hunted for food, now it's for trophies. That's what I call selfish.

[Big Dave2]

I got curious and emailed the dnr. They mentioned they're getting more positive feedback this year on apr.

Yeah.....I'm sure they would tell you if it were anything different.

[Big Dave2]

Some day it may come to a vote and we'll all have our chance to be for or against.

I would think that we should leave animal biology issues to the biologists rather than put it up to a popular vote?