DIDN'T EVEN SEE A DEER(4 DAYS)

[96trigger]

I don't entirely disagree with Blackjack. I've seen big bucks in SEMN, I've had trophies walk in front of me, I've missed 3 in the past 2 years. All have been with the bow, never with a firearm. No dump we all want to shoot trophy bucks.

In my area, the BIG deer are there, but they are smart, you really have to work at seeing them before the rut, once shotgun hits, they either get shot or go nocturnal. We have worldclass deer here in SEMN. I don't know about the rest of the state. I for one, DO NOT want to see herds of deer in fields. I like to see half a dozen here, half a dozen there. Herds mean that we have an overpopulation. I've seen the herds in Wiscosin, when I worked there, I've seen deer get real skinny, to the point that its sickening.

By the way, I've been in the presence of numerous trophys, like I said, 3 alive, many dead. I would NOT give up all the memories of my first deer with the shotgun ( a little doe) or with my bow, (another doe) or any of the other deer for that matter, for a chance at 1 monster. Thats not why I hunt, and I hope thats not why other people hunt. I hunt to be outdoors, I shoot does to help manage the population. I let numerous small bucks go during the season to help with deer management. I hunt, because thats what I love to do. I don't need large antlers to enjoy it.

Look at some of the websites, we have a Lot of Large bucks around here. Be thankful that we have as many as we do.

I don't like the way we live in a society where instant gratification is always wanted. What ever happened to being happy and thankful for what you have, if you want more, than go out and earn it. I've never seen a trophy buck during the 3B season, NEVER, so I took up bowhunting, is it more time and work? yes, but do I see the big bucks now? yes. I don't see the bucks because I cried to the DNR and want more regs, I just started putting in the time, a lot of it, that it takes to see the big boys. The deer population is doing great thanks to the DNR. It has come a long way in 30 years. If everyone walked out and shot a trophy, would it still be trophy? If so, why aren't does trophies. The rarity of the big buck makes it a trophy, if everyone gets one, where is the signicance?

Sorry, that is a rave, I've been holding back for a long time.

[Black_Bay]

Quote:

---

If everyone walked out and shot a trophy, would it still be trophy? If so, why aren't does trophies. The rarity of the big buck makes it a trophy, if everyone gets one, where is the signicance?

---

Great point!

[UdeLakeTom]

I think there is a term for it...."P" envy.

[BLACKJACK]

Good post 96trigger!

[bigbucks]

I don't even know how to respond to this post anymore...

Whoever said that they don't want to see a field with a 100 deer in it, is right. Sure it would be fun & we'd all enjoy that, but it's too many deer if there's anyone farming for a living & I don't mean leasing land to guides/outfitters. The farmers aren't going to make money with that high of a deer population. In those kind of conditions the herd could double in a year or two & quickly get to the point where there's very little recreational hunters can do to contain it. Both lawdog & blackjack are right in some ways, from my viewpoint.

Blackjack's hunting in an area where there are less deer. In an area like that it's probably much better to shoot a yearling buck & leave another doe alive to produce more offspring. She'll most likely still get bred & have two fawns. Yet if he shoots her, there will probably still be deer in that area, the population just won't grow.

Lawdog is hunting or at least talking about hunting in areas where there are plenty of deer or even too many deer. In that case shooting more female deer will help control the population much more than shooting a small buck, so why not let that buck grow up. Both areas will support deer hunting, but the management needs could be quite different.

I agree with whoever said there's no biology to support antler point restrictions, although there certainly can be to Earn A Buck. Antler point restrictions, will probably actually lessen the amount of mature deer & more breeding will be done by younger deer. The breeding by younger deer won't lower the quality potential other than that most antler restrictions, as has been discussed on here umpteen times, allow for the best quality young deer to still be killed. That would mean that more breeding could potentially be done by genetically inferior deer.

[UdeLakeTom]

Had to dig up this old post....here is the DNR report for 2006....somebody saw deer.

It’s official: Minnesota deer hunters, as a whole, had a good year in 2006.

For all seasons, nearly a half million hunters killed a total of 269,800 whitetails, the second-highest harvest ever recorded in the state and the fourth consecutive year they’ve killed more than a quarter million animals.

“Quite frankly, we did kill more than I thought we would,” said Lou Cornicelli, DNR big game program coordinator. “Hunters are taking advantage of those extra permits.”

The kill broke down like this: Firearms hunters killed 229,000 deer, about 6 percent more than last year; archers took a record 25,000 deer, about 8 percent more than last year; muzzleloader hunters killed 13,500 deer, down 4 percent from last year’s record; and hunters during the two-day early antlerless season took 2,300 deer.

Mark Johnson, executive director of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, was both pleased and surprised by the results, especially since there generally were considered to be difficult conditions under which to hunt deer during the firearms season.

“There was so much talk this year from people about, where are the deer,” he said. “Obviously, people found them.”

Cornicelli, likewise, doesn’t doubt that some hunters struggled, but said, “when you look at it as a whole, people did almost as well as they’ve ever done.”

A change that added a third tag to the all-season deer license likely was a main driver of the high harvest, as many archery hunters probably took an antlerless deer right off the bat, Cornicelli said.

All-season sales have been on the rise in recent years, as hunters purchased 32,000 in 2003, 46,000 in 2004, 59,000 in 2005, and 75,000 in 2006.

“My sense is the third tag really gave archers some more opportunity and they really took advantage of it,” he said. “The archery opportunity compared to everyone else is second to none. They’ve got the opportunity to kill a lot of deer.”

It’s the fourth consecutive year that hunters killed more than 250,000 deer. Prior to 2003, when that run began, hunters never had killed more than a quarter million deer during any one season.

The era of high harvest began with the 2003 season, when the DNR overhauled the way it manages deer, and, with some exceptions, began offering antlerless permits and over-the-counter licenses to make it easier for hunters to kill deer.

Hunters shouldn’t get used to near-record kills every year, Cornicelli said.

“I don’t think it’s sustainable,” he said. “At some point in time we are going to see some reduction of harvest that will track with reductions in population.”

While officials don’t expect much in the way of regulation changes for the next deer season, they do plan to look at ways to simplify some of the rules. They’ll also deal with some specific situations, like in permit area 431 near Appleton, for example.

There, the agency, through the lottery system, issued 100 firearms permits to kill antlerless deer. But the total harvest crept up to more than 200 antlerless deer, as muzzleloader and youth hunters were able to take a deer of either sex without applying in the lottery.

“When you kill more deer than you give permits for, there is going to be a problem,” Cornicelli said. “Other than that, we will keep the status quo for how we manage deer.”