I'm a little miffed...should I be or shouldn't I be?

[VMS]

Was up in Wisconsin for their rifle season with my in-laws this weekend. My father in law likes to hunt, but does not want the meat; my brother in law and sister in law only want does for meat.

Here is the scenario: Father in law shoots 2 deer yesterday: a nice doe and a nice 8 point buck. We get them home and of course the sister in law wants the doe and not the buck...stating that the meat would not taste as good due to the rut (this is news to me...I've never noticed any difference). So...they are all trying to decide what to do with the buck (I already have my venison from MN, but could always use more...and I want a trophy)and were going to donate it. This struck me as a bit odd... Shoot the buck for the antlers, but nobody wants the meat. I know they have the choice to keep or donate, but with such a high ratio of does to bucks(and culling should be with does..not bucks) why shoot the buck? The genetics are really strong, and if you don't want the meat from that particular animal, why shoot it? Would it not make more sense to take a doe and donate that, which in turn helps the herd and leave the buck for it's ability to reproduce with the genetics in it's line along with growing into more trophy potential for someone else to harvest?

I was a bit miffed because I felt like the buck was somewhat "wasted" in that they did not want the meat due to the time of year he was shot. But...because it was a buck, it was worth shooting.

I guess I don't get it... wisconsin went to a buck tag and an antlerless tag with the option of purchasing more antlerless over the counter in the herd control areas. If does are what you want for meat, why shoot the buck?

Am I off on my thinking here?

[BobT]

I agree with you. I have a hard time taking deer, fish, or any game for that matter if I can't use the meat. I guess if there's a need for donated meat then I don't have a lot of problem but if not....

Bob

[Black_Bay]

I don't think you're off base at all. Your father in law should have had someone set up to take the meat from a buck if he shot one. Donating it is a great idea though. Also I think your brother in law and sister in law are wrong that rutting bucks are bad tasting/tough. Some are, some are not. They should make the thing into sausage if they don't want the chops and steaks. BTW I agree given the situation, does only for eating, your father in law should have let the buck go if it wasn't huge.

[Nova]

you are right on track. I think your father in law should quit hunting if he doesn't want the meat. To shoot a buck just because it is a buck is just plain wrong.

[chucker34]

Ditto to all that's been said. BTW, I'd give my left n-t to get a doe, or just one deer, and the accompanying venison the way this season's beeng going for me. : )

[charliepete2]

In a state over run by deer, like Wisconsin, I think the DNR is happy to have hunters drop the hammer on what ever walks by. As long as the meat is donated and put to good use, I don't have a problem with it.

[not_nuf_time]

Nova, I agree with you. My first thought was that he should quit hunting, and maybe the rest of your party should take it upon yourselves to let him know you don't agree with his approach to hunting, unless he has an outlet for his kill, whatever it is. Sounds like a shooter, not a hunter.

[onthefly]

I buy the whole QDM theory. Any hunter who is just after meat, in my book, should shoot does if the buck to doe ratio is any worse that 1:1.

It's a good thing the meat will be used, however. What a waste if it wasn't.

[Coach1310]

Even though it isn't the best hunting ethics, the donated meat is going to good use and to families that need it. I am thankful that he didn't just cut the antlers off and leave the carcass lay. I have seen that a couple of time in MN.

[PerchJerker]

I'm with you VMS, I know some guys that hunt because they want to shoot something, but they don't want the meat --- I don't think it's right.

[VMS]

Hi everyone,

I have not talked to them about it yet, but I am sure it will come up in conversation this coming weekend. I did find out that the grandparents would take half the deer, but am unsure about what they did with the rest.

I know donating the meat is a good thing. The meat goes to a good cause. I just don't feel like things were handled as well as they could have been. A little better communication would have gone a long way in this case. If does are what people want for meat, then that is what should be taken. I know that if they ever need meat and I am up there to hunt, I know what I am going to harvest to help them out.

Thanks everyone...I just needed a place to vent and receive a little feedback.

Steve

[BLACKJACK]

Quote:

---

Hi everyone,

A little better communication would have gone a long way in this case. If does are what people want for meat, then that is what should be taken.

---

I think you hit the nail on the head, talk to them about only shooting what they will use. But don't be surprised if the father in law gives you a ration of *&^%, most deer hunters love to shoot horns.

[InTheSchool]

First of all it is their camp, you are a guest. Probably would go over like a lead ballon if you tried to change their views overnight. Maybe if you took the buck and fixed some backstraps with your favorite recipe you might convince them the flavor is no different? It is amazing how even families raised on adjacent land have different hunting philosophies and values. Personally, if I'm not eating it I don't shoot it. But donating the meat seems like an acceptable practice.