Buck Tag Applications??

[tjm]

I'll agree 100% with biglakebasses 1st post.I'll add that anyone under 18 and over 55 could shoot any deer.

Would also like to say to a few i know who put there 2cents in.

If your wanting big bucks look around another area

Invest in trail cams

Put more time in

Pass on that smaller buck the last day let him grow

I'll say this,trail cams speak for themselves.Just because you dont see big bucks in your area dont mean nothing.You think they get big in Minnesota for being dumb

Have seen plenty big bucks on cams i never see during hunting hours.Heck i know for a fact 2 bucks this year were never even seen but after dark.Farmers were suprised when i showed the pics from trail cams.

More big bucks around then 1 thinks do a little more home work.How do you think more and more record class bucks are being taken every year.

Locate a big buck set trail cams out before season get his pattern down.The days you can drive that extra hour to go hunt him on the right condition.If i know theres a big buck some place i can hunt 100 miles from here on a day i can go c-ya later

[shae1986]

Based on a survey of 1,000 deer hunters, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will not pursue regulations that would restrict the harvest of bucks in four west-central counties.

Nearly 60 percent of deer hunters who responded opposed regulations aimed at increasing the number of mature bucks by restricting the harvest of bucks with fewer than four antler points on one side.

"Given that the regulation would be largely social in nature, it would be difficult to pursue without majority support from deer hunters," said Lou Cornicelli, DNR big game program coordinator. "We will continue to look at different ways of managing deer populations that incorporate biological and social aspects of deer management."

Hunters returned about 77 percent of the surveys, which were mailed to a random sample of hunters in Lac Qui Parle, Yellow Medicine, Lyon and Lincoln counties. The University of Minnesota coordinated the survey.

Mike DonCarlos, DNR wildlife programs manager, said the high rate of return for the survey indicates that deer hunting and regulation changes are very important to hunters.

"Because deer hunters care deeply about their sport, they're more likely to respond to surveys," he said. "In turn the surveys provide an accurate reflection of opinions and are generally well accepted by the hunting public."

Just thought i would share this with all of you because some of my friends at the University were involved with this.

Andrew Shae

[BLACKJACK]

Can you post the actual questions that were asked?

[MN Mike]

I've been waiting for the results, where did you find them? I looked on the DNR's site last week but didn't see anything.

I got the survey back in Nov. - Dec. sometime. It was called: 2005 DEER HUNTER SATISFACTION AND PREFERENCES FOR REGULATION CHANGES IN MINNESOTA

1. Limiting the number of Buck tags for the season.

2. Point restrictions.

3. Moving the Firearms season out of the rut.

4. The famous ‘ Earn a Buck ‘ scenario.

They also discussed party hunting some, to the effect of not being able to cross tag deer or tag anyone else’s deer, you could still hunt as a party just shoot your own deer.

They also had a few different scenarios for each situation. I've still got one of the booklets, I'll see if I can get it scanned in if someone wants to look at the questions asked.

Mike

[luckey]

MN Mike

"They also discussed party hunting some, to the effect of not being able to cross tag deer or tag anyone else’s deer, you could still hunt as a party just shoot your own deer."

I guess in that case everyone hunting at the same time in Minnesota would be party hunting. lol

[iamgmc]

It's all about the money! In a state where I can have more deer in my frezzer than I can walleyes or candian geese.In areas that have large tracts of land you can experiment with different management practices.Someone is way of course sating that are farmers don't help wildlife.Granted they're trying to get the most out every acre,as I'm sure most of try to do with your own business.Go to any wildlife banquet and see who recieving the awards for stewardship a farmer.I think in MN different zones shouild be managed differently,also duck seasons should be split into a north and south zones.

[lawdog]

I don't know if I ever responded to this topic, but for what its worth, I don't have a problem with the idea of drawings for buck tags in the right settings, or for that matter antler restrictions which I have also advocated at times. There would have to be other adjustments to make some of these changes work in Minnesota (e.g. eliminate a ridiculous two day season), but they could work, don't think for an instant that the way we do it now is the only way that can work for our deer. The people I know in North Dakota would not go away from their buck tag drawing system to go to ours, they think its just nuts what we do, so consider that when you say hunters wouldn't like it.

What I see over and over when anyone talks about any types of changes, be it QDM or this or whatever, is a "sky is falling" knee jerk reaction from everybody who doesn't want anything changed and "doesn't want anybody telling us how to hunt" (I always loved that one since the whole current scheme is regulated by someone telling you already...).

This is an interesting discussion and I'd just like to see everyone keep their minds open to new ideas and possible ways to make our situation better...

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

I've been waiting for the results, where did you find them? I looked on the DNR's site last week but didn't see anything.

I got the survey back in Nov. - Dec. sometime. It was called: 2005 DEER HUNTER SATISFACTION AND PREFERENCES FOR REGULATION CHANGES IN MINNESOTA

1. Limiting the number of Buck tags for the season.

2. Point restrictions.

3. Moving the Firearms season out of the rut.

4. The famous ‘ Earn a Buck ‘ scenario.

They also discussed party hunting some, to the effect of not being able to cross tag deer or tag anyone else’s deer, you could still hunt as a party just shoot your own deer.

They also had a few different scenarios for each situation. I've still got one of the booklets, I'll see if I can get it scanned in if someone wants to look at the questions asked.

Mike

---

Mike,

You're talking about a different survey. The one you got was a preference choice for regulation change. It went out to 6,000 hunters throughout the state. The antler point survey was just sent out to people who hunted in 5 west-central permit areas. It was only 3 questions and was done as a response to some legislation that was proposed last year. Those were the results that are in this weeks Outdoor News. The results of the survey you completed won't be available for a while.

Also, I think there's a bit of confusion between party hunting and cross-tagging. Nobody is trying to outlaw people hunting together (party hunting). The intent is to find out if people can live with shooting their own buck, which would be cross-tagging. Minnesota is actually one of only a few states that lets you (legally) shoot deer for each other.

I hope that clears it up.

[MN Mike]

Ok, that explains it, I'll have to wait. I don't get a chance to see every issue of Outdoor News so I probably missed the one with the other results in it.

I understood the party hunting and cross tagging thing, wouldn't bother me if it stayed or went away, our party does so little of the cross tagging it wouldn't matter.

Mike

[luckey]

Not that it's real hard to do, but now I'm confused. From what I read here, it sounds like the hunter surveys and meetings indicated we want to keep "party hunting". However, with that in mind someone want's to change the law to allow party hunting but not allow cross tagging. Whats the point! The whole reason behind "party hunting" IS cross tagging. Am I missing something here?

[Mark Christianson]

10000% the same thing going through my head luckey.

What did I miss?

[BLACKJACK]

The whole point behind party hunting is NOT cross tagging, its to allow hunters to hunt as a group, to enjoy the comraderie of group, etc. in the same area, and make deer drives if they want. A group hunting together is more effective - most times - than four people hunting alone. Without party hunting, the poster would only be able to shoot one deer, then watch the rest run by. With small areas to hunt and only a two days to hunt you may never see those deer again, they're off in the next section.

[Mark Christianson]

From the reg book:

“Party hunting”

means that members of a party may take animals for other members’

limits.

Isn't this cross tagging or am I mis-understanding what people are saying is cross tagging?

Still cornfused.

[JEV]

Quote:

---

From the reg book:

“Party hunting”

means that members of a party may take animals for other members’

limits.

Isn't this cross tagging or am I mis-understanding what people are saying is cross tagging?

Still cornfused.

---

I believe they are the same. But, here's the difference. You could still in fact have "party" hunting but no cross tagging. "Party" meaning you could hunt the same woods together, make drives together, etc. But, you could only tag a deer that you yourself shot. Many states do not even allow "party" hunting, that is making drives in a group. It is a solo mission. You hunt by yourself and tag your own deer.

JEV

[lawdog]

I think BLB is right, the general and common use of the term party hunting, and as Wisc. and MN use it is cross tagging. Not allowing deer drives is a completely different issue. No state that I've ever heard of eliminates hunting with a party and requires that you have to drive out separately and can't sit anywhere near somebody or something like that. The tagging is the issue, not how many or who is out there somewhere.

[shae1986]

Let me tell you this is a very confusing subject. But my thoughts on it are that cross tagging is probably not going away anytime soon. i have even compiled a few reasons why i beilieve that.

1. They tried no cross tagging or "party hunting" with the All season licence the first year it was available and that ruling only lasted that year.

2. Hard to enforce. Unless it is seen it would be difficult to tell who shot the deer. Yes you can look at the caliber of gun, but still very tough to tell. It would be one of the acts of seeing. Unless the CO caught a guy still hunting that didn't have any tags left, and maybe thats what they would be looking for, but in MN where you can shoot 5 deer, i dont know how big of a problem tags are.

3. The State of Minnesota wants more and more deer harvested because of there growing numbers. By taking away cross tagging people are more likely to not shoot that doe for there neighbor, or another one for there father-in-law.

I think the way for the more harvest of does in Minnesota is to either have a buck tag application (for it), antler restrictions (Very much for it) or earn a buck (not for it). Now the one i am not for is the earn a buck but really it wouldn't matter too much too me since i shoot the first dow that walks by with my bow.

I believe something has to be done to lessen the deer heard. I wish i could say what that was but i really dont know, I wouldn't mind seeing a longer bow season

Sorry i wrote so much, i hope you read it, i did put a little thought into it, and if you think i am totally off the wall with what i said, tell me, i dont mind the critisim.

Andrew Shae

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

I think BLB is right, the general and common use of the term party hunting, and as Wisc. and MN use it is cross tagging. Not allowing deer drives is a completely different issue. No state that I've ever heard of eliminates hunting with a party and requires that you have to drive out separately and can't sit anywhere near somebody or something like that. The tagging is the issue, not how many or who is out there somewhere.

---

Correct. The intent would NOT be to move away from people driving deer for each other or hunting as a group. The intent is to make you shoot your own buck. There's definitely a difference between hunting as a party and cross-tagging bucks for each other.

Sorry to confuse the issue, that wasn't my intent.

[Mark Christianson]

Thank you very much for taking time to post on this forum lcornice!

I know I appreciate it a lot. Good to hear factual info.

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

Thank you very much for taking time to post on this forum lcornice!

I know I appreciate it a lot. Good to hear factual info.

---

Not a problem. I like to keep people informed ... even if we don't all agree :-)

[B. Amish]

i say leave the deer hunting system alone, if you want trophy bucks keep on trying to influence your neighbors to let them grow and dont shoot little ones yourself. why have the dnr make that choice for everyone.

i have shot a grand total of 3 bucks in over ten years of hunting, my first one was a wounded basket, second and third went on the wall, i like the fact that it was my choice if i wanted to pull the trigger or release the arrow and not someone elses.

i say let the dnr focus on waterfowl and wetlands

[BLACKJACK]

Quote:

---

From the reg book:

“Party hunting”

means that members of a party may take animals for other members’ limits.

---

If its from the reg book, I stand corrected.

Let me try again. If it was strictly enforced that it was one tag, one deer, if you were hunting with a group, doing a drive, and shot and tagged a deer, you'd have to drop out of the drive. Party hunting allows you to continue hunting with your group, even though your tag has been filled. Yes, you can shoot and tag another deer - 'cross-tagging' - but if your group decides that everyone in the group shoots their own deer, party hunting allows you to hunt as a group even after you've shot your deer.

In the past, our deer hunting group has always said that that any youth hunters were going to shoot and tag their own deer, we weren't going to use their tag as an extra doe permit.

There have been some court cases where CO's have ticketed people that were several miles away from people in their party, had filled their tag, and yet still claimed they were party hunting. Not sure what the final resolution was.

With the DNR's desire to see more deer shot, I don't see party hunting being eliminated anytime soon.

[almostthere!]

Why buck lottery?

1. So a hunter may see more bucks roam by their tree stand: you know, like those hunting shows where the hunter is sitting in his tree stand and passes on big bucks after big bucks because their antlers are not above the 150 class.

2. Some areas of Minnesota really needs more mature bucks; so instead of asking the DNR to do a special buck lottery for those area, the hunters of the affected areas are asking for buck lottery for the whole state. "Why should our areas be the only ones restricted by this special lottery."

3. "I do not want to put the time into scouting and where I hunt (next to the road), I do not see any big bucks. Therefore, a buck lottery is needed so that in the future, should I be lucky enough to be drawn, I will see big bucks from my road-side stands."

4. Big bucks are the only trophies. The more big bucks we have around, the more trophies there are.

5. Who cares about the buck to doe ratio. Take all the does you want. We want to see nothing but antlers when we go "hunting".

6. People hunt deer for antlers only. The bigger the antlers, the bigger the bragging rights.

[lawdog]

Utter nonsense Almostthere! Your post adds nothing of value to a good thread.

[almostthere!]

Lawdog,

That is exactly what I think of a state wide buck lottery system. I know it will be good for some areas but to mandate a state wide system is just a lazy hunter's way of killing a deer for its huge rack. Bucks with monster racks are all around us in this state. If a hunter puts an effort into scouting/hunt, he/she will realize that we do not need a state wide lottery system.

Sorry, lawdog. This thread is just tooo funny. People here has been arguing this for the last two years and before that, it was QDM. And before QDM, it was "unethical" to shoot fawns, spikes, forkies, and baskets.

If a hunter do not see a trophy in a kill through fair chase, whether it be a big buck, small buck, fawn, or doe, then the person should join the game ranch scenario.

I know there are some good hunters out there who put their time into the hunt and come home with huge antlers year after year. If these hunters can do it, why do we need a statewide buck lottery system.

[xedge2002]

Hey Almost I never thought this thread would go this long but I guess a lot of people have an opinion on it. I agree I know of people who see and get big bucks every year but they also are able to hunt a lot of real good land in an agricultural area along a river. I would like to see it so that all of the smaller bucks don't get shot up. Most of the people who shoot small bucks are hunting for the meat and not the rack. That's why I would say to take a doe instead of a buck to let the bucks get bigger and be better trophies. Where I hunt we don't have a chance to see big bucks because people come out from the metro area to hunt WMA and will shoot anything that moves. It would also help to control the deer herd which is something the DNR has supposedly trying to do the last few years.