Earn A Buck

[Joe15]

I believe that in minnesota they should imply the earn a buck program to where you have to shoot a doe before you shoot a buck that would decrease the doe to buck ratio...well guess thats just what i believe...i mean look at wisconsin...they have it they have tons of nice bucks commin out of there

[BuckKiller]

I would hate that I don't see many does where i hunt...

[Joe15]

u serious...down here in southwest we probably see three to four does somes times more to every one buck

[Scott Stein]

we hunt by hackensack and every year there is less and less deer.....idk if its cuz u can get a bonus permit or what but i seemed like every truck had a couple fawns in it this yr we didnt even hunt up there and other guys from our hunting party did and seen 3 deer both wknds....no one went up this wknd bcuz of it....so if this were to happen they should make it u have to shoot an actual doe not a fawn or button buck a mature doe...idk why they have the bonus tag up there theres simply no deer....i like the earn a buck idea though

[Mark Christianson]

Does EAB apply in WI to archery hunting too?

Just curious.

I am on the fence for EAB. Good idea in some areas, no good for other areas.

Obviously EAB in a lottery zone wont ever happen. So that cuts out a large part of the state right off the bat.

[jltimm]

I say we have the rifle season at the same time Wisconsin does.Last week of Nov. After the rut.Eliminate party hunting, stiffen the non-baiting laws for violaters, and take away their hunting rights when they get caught.

[FLnick87]

legalize baiting. keep party hunting. later rifle season. no earn a buck. 8 pt antler restriction.

my .02

[Deitz Dittrich]

Does EAB apply in WI to archery hunting too?

Yes, EAB is for archery as well.

[Mark Christianson]

Having the rifle season the same as WI, could impact numbers of hunters in the woods.

And my guess would be that people are going to choose WI over MN in a lot of cases.

So in essence you lower deer hunter numbers in MN, and I dont think the DNR is going to flirt with that issue.

[MUSKY18]

Hey Browning......we hunt by Hackensack as well and this year was way down from past years. I only got 4 deer for our party, although I could have shot more but didn't. 3 out of the 4 were does (2 fawns) and my son hit a nice buck that we couldn't find. This was the first year since the lat 90's that we haven't gotten our limit. I don't know if the deer are running on a cycle like grouse or what. My brother has a "golden" stand that has taken 5 bucks in the previous 5 years and was considered automatic. Haven't seen a deer off the stand this year. Opening afternoon I had deer in front of my stand for almost an hour, but no horns. We seem to find the doesn and fawns, but he bucks are coming harder and harder to come by.

I would favor an Earn A Buck, but like stated above, you should have to harvest a doe that is at least 2 years old or older. Let the young button bucks and fawns grow up and thin the heard of mature does. Our area (245) has been a management/intensive harvest area for quite a few years now, so I would think that Earn A Buck would help control the population to the point where you wouldn't need the management/intensive harvest areas. Just my thoughts......

[jltimm]

Having the rifle season the same as WI, could impact numbers of hunters in the woods.

And my guess would be that people are going to choose WI over MN in a lot of cases.

This would be better yet, less people in the woods, and more deer to be seen.Another thing too, they could do away with that early antlerless season.I understand that the DNR would probably be against having MN and Wisc. seasons at the same time, but they don't seem to know what they're doing anyhow?

[Mark Christianson]

Bottom line, the DNR isnt going to do anything that will cause hunter loss in MN.

I agree. Let em go to Sconny and keep more deer for us. But its never going to happen. The DNR is trying to remove deer. Not save them. Losing hunters will reduce harvest.

I wouldnt go so far as to say they dont know what they are doing.

They will never please 100% of the population. No matter what they do.

[mrklean]

well said biglake, something really big has to happen for them to do anything, one bad year that i guess the numbers dont look as bad as we think wont do anything to the dnr. I would love to see something different, have to draw for buck tags or something Earn a buck something to help the buck popultion would be great, but really you arent going to change people who shoot whatever they see mature or fawn. The hunter is the first thing that needs to change in my opinion, get them to stop shooting fawns spikes and 4 pointers and we will see the big bucks down the line.

[96trigger]

Earn a buck would blow. Have you guys not seen the threads on here where people are just not seeing the deer? I am in an Intensive harvest area and I would not say that it is lousy with does. If I hunt enough, I'll get a chance to take one, but in no way are they so populated where I can just go out and take my pick of a doe. In Sconny, they are pretty thick. It is not that hard to get one. Right now, in an intensive area, I'm hunting my but off just to get a mature doe. If we want to do something about the number of mature bucks, allow absolutely no party hunting if you shoot a mature buck, you are absolutely done shooting bucks. There should be NO cross tagging for bucks. I don't want to rip on anybody who does that now, because it is legal, I just don't think they are helping the population by allowing party hunting. As for does, there are enough management opportunities that not many should need to cross tag does. I really think that would help. I'm sure that there would still be some cheaters, but it might some might actually follow the rules. Also, move the season back one week. In the southeast, make it a 5 day 3A season, bucks only, then open it back up for the 3B after it has been closed for 2 days.

Wisconsin is overpopulated with deer, that is why the EAB program is instituted, Who on here thinks we have an overpopulation of deer? I am in intensive harvest area 342, we have a nice amount of deer, but it is not an over populated. I would take a complete redesign of the system down here and I don't think it is going to fly anytime soon unless the deer herd gets out of control.

[Musky Buck]

I have seen only 1 doe in the past 3 years and have the luxury to hunt 3 different areas. It would turn into the honest people doing it the right way and the dishonest people shooting that buck first doe second anyway or if no doe dragging that buck to the house in the dark and not tagging it, just butchering it. Or, wouldn't we all flock to bow hunt so we can get our doe out of the way before rifle season ? I think our fawns, especially button bucks because they are bigger usually than a doe fawn, would really pay the price. I think our state is different from top to bottom and some areas wouldn't handle earn a buck very well. We already have intensive harvest areas and the like and people,wolves,cars are already thinning down the herd enough.

[Musky Buck]

If you can hunt an area that has the October doe season, if you tagged an antlerless would that count then toward earn a buck ? If it did those areas would probably be under intense hunting pressure and there would be no selective harvest going on, blast a baldy so you can open the regular rifle season a buck hunter or heck I would bet some this is a reach but heck tag a road kill, claim it as a bow shot deer to avoid earning a buck ? Just some wild thoughts guys but we all know how some work hard to get around the law. I think our state is diverse and there are pockets of overpopulation, but in my intensive area things seem under control, too much so.

[Quackaddict9]

I think if we were to do something like this, Something like what ND does sounds good to me. ROST said something in a thread about lottery picks in each county or something that we could do here in MN. People wanting to shoot bucks need to put their name in a lottery and if you dont get one, you can only shoot a doe and if have a buck of the lifetime walk by you pass it up or maybe do "dont get caught" like some people think.

Otherwise earn a buck will work out for me because there are plenty of does in my area but for some there is not. So I don't see this working out.

[slabchaser]

Im not a biologist but I dont think an earn a buck would work that well everywhere in mn. I think that an EAB season is meant for areas with high populations of deer. Yes WI has earn a buck and have lots of deer but they would have a high population of deer without it also. It appears that most people just arent seeing deer in general not just bucks.

I think the DNR needs to limit everyone in MN with lower populations of deer to 1 buck and a doe lottery. you need does to make more deer.

In areas with lots of deer the DNR should think abotu doing a earn a buck.

I think once the populations get established the DNR should have a point restriction for the entire state. just my opinion im prolly wrong

[Musky Buck]

Honestly, giving it more thought I'd either bow hunt a doe/fawn or hunt the October antlerless season so my buck tag is wide open come rifle season if those were ok to satisfying earn a buck. I have land where I see way more bucks than does. Last 15 deer I've seen were 9 antlered bucks, 2 does, and 4 fawns and this covers the past 3 years. On trail cam 2 week period before rifle season had 12 different bucks, 2 does and 1 fawn on it. Come rifle season I saw 1 buck, a 14 pointer and no other deer the rest of the season.

[Cooter]

Careful what you wish for - the unit I hunt in WI has been EAB for the past 3 years and the numbers are WAY down. I don't have a problem with EAB in general - it has proven to be an effective management tool, however, the DNR IMO has gone overboard with it in certain areas. The past two years our group of 3 has seen fewer deer combined than each of us used to see individually. I saw two deer Sat and one Sun in beautiful, prime whitetail country. We are gonna send a letter/petition to the DNR and will have no problem getting signatures.

I mentioned it before on a post, but many areas such as where I hunt have gone from needing to apply for, and maybe getting, a choice permit so you could shoot a single doe to mandatory doe harvest for a buck sticker. Pretty radical change in management.

[96trigger]

It would really be nice if we (in MN) could just maintain a satisfactory population. It seems like there are swings from lottery to intensive, and back. I think the whole state should either be lottery or managed. Three deer a year is plenty for most people, but I still think some shoot 5 because they can. I know that some people maybe go through five a year, but I don't think that they would have problems getting a few more from friends or relatives if it was needed or if they wanted some more. After reading the reports on here and from hunters in my area, I don't think the population is anywhere near where it should be considered EAB. I think that there are some areas that have heavy concentrations of deer, and others that are relatively void, but in the overall scheme of things, it is still a relatively moderate average for the population. Not too high, and not too low.

[Mark Christianson]

So much pressure is put on the 5 deer limit.

Less than 5% of hunters take 3 deer or more as it stands today.

That said, most intensive harvest areas are not suffering because of people hoarding deer.

[Musky Buck]

Right on Cooter, we need to ask people from other states that hunt deer to have their input on baiting, EAB, etc.Let's not try to reinvent the wheel. For the most part I think most hunters are ok with the way we have it now, no bait, our rut hunting is the bait, no EAB, your party can decide if they wish to hunt that way, why do things because of waiting until it's in our 2009 handbook, make the best decisions for your area for what you are allowed to take, my dad and I since 1994 have been only taking larger bucks with no exceptions, sure makes you wonder when you get a bruiser is that a buck you let go a year or two before ? Anyway, we hit a horrible winter soon and there will be changes. The grass isn't always greener and change doesn't mean it will be for the better and what is enough or good enough for each hunter in MN. It's 2008, things are way different today than it was 1983 when I started. My first year it was 3 days first weekend bucks only and the 2nd weekend was 2 days buck or doe depending on if you received a doe permit by application. That was the last year for the metal tags with the big ball on the end. I'm convinced there were more deer in my areas then when we had to apply for the permit to now having intensive and a early rifle doe hunt, remember the huge deer yarding up in the winter ? then 1984 came 2 days and then 4 days, doe either weekend if drawn. Just some thoughts, good luck blackpowdering !

[96trigger]

Quote:

Less than 5% of hunters take 3 deer or more as it stands today.

Those are the deer that are registered, there are lot more that party hunt, shoot 5 deer, and have them registered under someone elses name. Still, if only 5% register 5 deer, why do we need it??? Not saying that its right or wrong, but it happens more than we think. I suppose in the grand scheme of things, its pretty minor as long as everyone registers their deer.

[sticknstring]

Quote:

there are lot more that party hunt, shoot 5 deer, and have them registered under someone elses name.

Exactly. Get rid of the party hunting! You shoot it, you tag it.