Antler Point Restrictions

[Musky Buck]

It's kinda silly. Here we are, many of us already have or do let them go/grow, we are helping lots of hunters bag that little guy by us passing on him. We are trying to talk some into growing state wide bigger bucks. I like the shed post, huge set and people are all wow etc. That's what can happen if they can get older, they get bigger. I'm not saying QDM can work everywhere although I wish people would try. The Hillview group, seems to be working, if they are disgruntled any of them I wish they'd speak up, doesn't seem to be the case. There is no doubt the bucks you see on their HSOforum were most definitely passed on when they were inferior. 82% of polled hunters, I think that was the number, wanted to see larger bucks. Well, then lets do something about it and step 1 is we have x number of yearling bucks around each year, how do we harvest less of them so more can reach maturity ?

[CSTPETER]

The way I see it, we currently have a management program that does absolutely nothing to encourage the non harvest of yearling bucks. Zero, Nada. In the spectrum of Deer management we are completely skewed to the quantity side. On the other end, Way down there,(you might need binoculars to see it) is the total quality side. I don't think anyone here is advocating a complete change in management philosophy, but we are going to need to find a more balanced approach if we are going to try to satisfy the Deer hunting consumer in this state. Is APR the way to go? I don't know, but we need to try something. Let's face it, times are changing whether we like it or not. A lot of us learned how to hunt from previous generations that actually needed the meat. Deer hunting wasn't something done for enjoyment but out of a real need to feed the family. You could say I've come full circle. When I started hunting with my Grandpa and Great Uncles, when you saw a deer, any deer, you better darn well shoot it. It may have taken three generations, but I just don't feel the same sense of urgency that they did. I'd rather see one mature buck than a hundred yearlings. I think it's a change that's taking place throughout the state. You can blame it on Lee and Tiffany if you want too, but it's also a cultural shift. My bottom line is that We need these changes if we are going to keep future generations interested in hunting here. The product We offer now is outdated.

[vister]

Hey Musky, have a comparison for you. Others can chime in if they want to. But, Musky and I have a few things in common. One, I'm guessing we don't live too far apart from each other. Two, Both ourselves and our party have harvested state record book deer in the past 5 years. Hmmm...I'm guessing that is because of the QDM practice done by a lot of the hunters in our neck of the woods.

This whole antler point restriction topic should more or less be ignored by people who just hunt for the meat. Cause if you don't care about antler size, then this topic means nothing to you.

[james_walleye]

Sorry BobT but a healthy deer herd doesnt have a harvest where over 85% of the bucks are yearlings. A healthy deer herd has a much higher percentage of mature bucks in it than MN does.

Its also very obvious you have never seen QDM at work if you think the state of MN is as close to "utopia" as can be.

Every part of our state would produce "trophy bucks", but in most parts of the state the only thing that keeps them from getting there is they can't get past 1 1/2 years old. The whole state of MN, just as the rest of the midwest has genetics 2nd to none.

I'd like to see something, anywhere, that says the MN deer herd is healthy. Its quite the opposite, numbers don't make a deer herd healthy. And now in many parts of the state, we don't even have the numbers much less mature bucks.....

[Big Dave2]

This whole antler point restriction topic should more or less be ignored by people who just hunt for the meat. Cause if you don't care about antler size, then this topic means nothing to you.

But if I ignore it then you guys will push a bunch of legislation unopposed that I am not in favor of.

[BobT]

Sorry BobT but a healthy deer herd doesnt have a harvest where over 85% of the bucks are yearlings. A healthy deer herd has a much higher percentage of mature bucks in it than MN does.

Its also very obvious you have never seen QDM at work if you think the state of MN is as close to "utopia" as can be.

Every part of our state would produce "trophy bucks", but in most parts of the state the only thing that keeps them from getting there is they can't get past 1 1/2 years old. The whole state of MN, just as the rest of the midwest has genetics 2nd to none.

I'd like to see something, anywhere, that says the MN deer herd is healthy. Its quite the opposite, numbers don't make a deer herd healthy. And now in many parts of the state, we don't even have the numbers much less mature bucks.....

I don't agree. If a herd is not healthy it will die off either because of health reasons directly like disease, illness, and starvation OR by predation as those predators will concentrate their efforts on the sick, weak, and young before trying to take a healthy adult. Size doesn't necessarily mean healthy as a deer can be large and not healthy. As a meat hunter, yes we are as close to utopia as we have EVER been. Deer numbers are higher than in any recorded history and in terms of meat, I'd much rather enjoy the tenderness of a 1-1/2 year old than the tough, testosterone and adrenaline laced meat from an old buck in full rut any day on my dinner table.

Bob

[vister]

any doe or fawn is more tender than a yearling buck. once they start sporting head gear, they also start getting jacked up. Even spike bucks do the same stuff in the woods as a 7 year old bruiser. just the bruiser knows, probably by experience, to lay low to survive.

[Bear55]

I’m sorry, that’s not what I said. I replied to comments implying that we should be required to take does and let the bucks walk to promote seeing more large bucks. If I recall correctly, the comments tried to liken it to C&R fishing and like many of the threads in this discussion was also leaning toward the idea that large racks equals healthy deer. Rack size has nothing to do with deer herd health. The opposite, maybe.

I said, if the only purpose for pushing this idea is to see larger bucks then visit a preserve where it already exists and you can see all the large bucks you want, even if they are artificially produced through controlled genetics, predation control, food plots, and the like. If we think we can turn our wild deer population into some kind of utopia I'm afraid we are sadly living in a dream world. That is not likely to happen or possibly not even possible in todays Minnesota with the human sprawl. Personally, I think we are right now as close to a utopia as we can get.

Whether or not the ideal buck:doe ratio is 1:1 is also questionable. Oh sure, biologists could be found that would back this claim just as there are those that would refute it but natural selection would prove reality. Unfortunately, to make that happen we would have to take the human element out of the equasion and give the entire state back to the wildlife or would we? Aren't we also a factor in the equasion? After all, we too are predators.

For me, just like a wolf or other predator, I hunt deer because I enjoy the meat. Okay, as an emotional human I also enjoy the challenge of the hunt but putting the heads of my kills on a trophy wall doesn't appeal to me. That is not to say that I wouldn’t get a thrill if a bruiser happens my way but I don’t live and hunt specifically for the trohpy and I don’t feel it is fair for anyone else to force me to do so any more than it would be for me to deny trophy hunters the same privilege by passing laws restricting us to take small deer and does.

Bob

Rack size is a reflection of a bucks health. During the rut the does will seek out the mature deer with the largest racks because they are perceived to have superior genes and better health.

We are not in a dream world to think that we can have better hunting than we have now. Look at all the states around us, look at the guys to practice QDM in our state, look at what our state use to produce, all the proof in the world is out there. We were once the envy of the country when it came to deer hunting, suddely we are the only state in the midwest who loves to shoot spikes and forks.

The problem with the human element on the deer heard is we unfairly target immature bucks thinking we are helping the population. Sure we might be growing the population but its far from a balanced healthy population. Before we arrived the predators kept the population in check, but I would be willing to bet those wolves prayed on the weak and the sick, they sure didn't target 90% of the young bucks. Now you throw man in there, next thing you know we decide we are smarter than mother nature and now we have a population of deer which is anything but what nature intended.

[Getanet]

"This whole antler point restriction topic should more or less be ignored by people who just hunt for the meat. Cause if you don't care about antler size, then this topic means nothing to you."

Don't intend on sounding smug here, but if you are a meat hunter this topic means quite a bit to you. If AR were to become a regulation it directly impacts your ability to harvest a deer. Self-imposed AR is great, don't want it forced upon me.

[CSTPETER]

Bob T, Numbers don't make a healthy deer herd. Any Biologist will take a look at Mn's age structure and Buck/Doe ratio and shake his head. We are not in "utopia" my friend. More like the Wal-mart of the deer hunting world.

I'd also dispute the claim that Mn does not have the Nutrition or genetics to produce trophy class deer in all areas of the state. What our herd truly lacks is age. I'm pretty sure any buck that reach's 3.5 years of age anywhere in this state is going to be considered a trophy by 99% of the Deer hunters out there.

This whole argument seems so crazy to me. Why is it so hard for a "meat hunter" to let an immature buck walk and wait for a doe? Can you guys honestly tell me that you feel it's a challenge and satisfying to take out these clueless teenagers of the deer world? I get the vibe that it's one of those deals like keeping your entire fish limit every time you go fishing, Shooting ducks on the water or ground pounding grouse, You can do it but is it the right thing to do?

[Getanet]

How many deer a year do you see CSTPETER? I was only able to hunt 5 days last year. I saw one deer, a doe, which I took. If it would have been a buck - big or small, I likely would have done the same. But I would hardly characterize that as being a game hog.

[james_walleye]

Originally Posted By: james_walleye

Sorry BobT but a healthy deer herd doesnt have a harvest where over 85% of the bucks are yearlings. A healthy deer herd has a much higher percentage of mature bucks in it than MN does.

Its also very obvious you have never seen QDM at work if you think the state of MN is as close to "utopia" as can be.

Every part of our state would produce "trophy bucks", but in most parts of the state the only thing that keeps them from getting there is they can't get past 1 1/2 years old. The whole state of MN, just as the rest of the midwest has genetics 2nd to none.

I'd like to see something, anywhere, that says the MN deer herd is healthy. Its quite the opposite, numbers don't make a deer herd healthy. And now in many parts of the state, we don't even have the numbers much less mature bucks.....

I don't agree. If a herd is not healthy it will die off either because of health reasons directly like disease, illness, and starvation OR by predation as those predators will concentrate their efforts on the sick, weak, and young before trying to take a healthy adult. Size doesn't necessarily mean healthy as a deer can be large and not healthy. As a meat hunter, yes we are as close to utopia as we have EVER been. Deer numbers are higher than in any recorded history and in terms of meat, I'd much rather enjoy the tenderness of a 1-1/2 year old than the tough, testosterone and adrenaline laced meat from an old buck in full rut any day on my dinner table.

Bob

I dont think you are getting what people are getting at. If an individual deer is not healthy it will die off due to the reasons you listed. Yeah individual deer are healthy in MN but thats a far cry from the herd being healthy. Numbers do not mean healthy, any biologist will tell you that. The age structure in MN bucks is horrible and that is a big part of the health of a deer herd. A healthy deer herd has many more mature bucks in the age structure than Mn does.

If you want to oppose AR that is your opinion, but please don't try to argue against AR because our deer herd is already healthy, everyone knows it isnt and it isnt even close. When i walk into a butcher shop to register the doe i shot opening weekend and there are 30 bucks hanging in there and not a single one is older than a yearling we have serious problems. That is far, and I mean from from being anything close to healthy. And when we see the DNR implement regs along these lines in parts of our state remember this thread because we all have heard the DNR state many times it does not manage our deer herd for "trophys". When the DNR implements these regs its going to be because they recognize the herd isnt healthy and they will implement these regs for the herd itself. Just having the DNR itself talking about AR and EAB should be enough to tell everyone here that the DNR does recognize the problem and they are kicking around the best ways to improve the health of the herd.

[james_walleye]

Espicially for someone saying meat hunters are in a "utopia", why is it so hard to let a buck walk and shoot a doe where this person is hunting? I understand the guy who sits for 5 days and sees 1 deer, im certainly not talking about this guy or the areas of the state which are like this.

[james_walleye]

The DNR doesnt manage the deer herd for trophys so "we" will not be pushing any legislation through. If the DNR implements regs its either to help the herd or on public opinion and being "we" are the vocal minority i guess we know the that the reason the DNR is even kicking around ideas such as EAB and AR is because they recognize the problem.

[Getanet]

What I didn't point out was I hunt in a part of the state with plenty of deer. In fact, we can purchase at least 2 management tags - perhaps more - I don't know because I've never bought one.

But my point is there are a lot deer and a lot of cover. I get the impression from some on here that 95% of the bucks in this state are in somebody's cross hairs at some point during the season. I just don't feel that's the case. I think plenty of bucks make it through the season relatively unscathed.

[james_walleye]

Depends on what part of the state you are talking about. Much of the old zone 4 there is NOT alot of cover and there isnt alot of deer and most bucks by a long shot do not see 2 years old much less 3 years old in a large part of this area. I have relatives that absolutely do not see 2 year old bucks or older. And in areas like this you wouldnt see AR put in anyway.

[DaveT]

In the far NE part of the state that may be the case, everywhere else 90 to 95 % is an accurate number, Getanet.

I just got back from a long weekend in Kansas, knocked on doors in Mo and Ia on the way back. One of the things that strikes you about these places is the lack of roads, frequently, they have less cover than most parts of this state, but they may have 3 miles between roads. That ground protects deer simply by being hard to access. We don't have that in most parts of this state. We also have more hunters, more and longer seasons than most of these other states, and better equipment. That pressure ensures that most bucks walk through somebody's crosshairs at some point during the fall.

MN used to produce a lot more trophy sized bucks in the 70s and 80s when we had less deer than we do now. We also had less hunters, shorter seasons, less seasons, and worse equipment. That is why some bucks made it through the year and had a chance to grow up, even though there were less of them around, a greater number made it to adulthood than do now, we are just that much more efficient in our hunting than we ever were in the past.

If we want, and obviously some don't, to get more bucks to 3 or 4 years of age, something has to give. There are many ways to accomplish it, none of which are going to be popular with everybody. Antler restrictions are a feasible way of accomplishing this, as is eliminating buck party hunting, I have it from a reliable source that 30% of our buck harvest is cross tagged. Another way would be to lottery the buck tags, very unpopular but that is what most western states do with elk and even mule deer in some areas. Another way could be to shorten the seasons, or put bucks off limits during some of the seasons.

I believe we are going to see something along these lines in the parts of the state that are at or near population goals. I think it is long overdue, I also believe that it will only limit opportunity for some and only then for a year or 2. Remember, if you have 100 yearling bucks and none get shot, you will start the next season off with 100 2 year old bucks, and another 100 yearling bucks. You will see twice as many bucks the second year and will have just as many legal animals to shoot at. Of course there will be winterkill and car kills and what have you, and a few of those 2 year olds might not have legal antlers, but you get the point. It's not that much of a sacrifice, and the end result will be a more enjoyable season for all of us.

[Musky Buck]

Yes Vister, you are right on. The reason we keep having the chance at larger bucks is because we let the yearlings go for sure. That must happen because they are already alive, survived their first winter as a fawn. Getanet realize to last rifle season was tough weather wise, it wasn't a real great year to see numbers of deer, when the wind is howling at first shooting light that hasn't been my best weather scenario. Times have changed, no doubt when I first started it was more about the meat but we even knew back then that a large buck was once a small buck, it didn't take long for us to change even having just 2 days to hunt. The payoff is we have a nice mix of all sized bucks and about every other year someone gets a true giant like the state record buck. The Tiffany and Lee....I was thinking the Hillview land is about 5,000 acres, well that's exactly the same size acreage that Lee and Tiffany own in Iowa. If we all could find and afford 5,000 acres it would be a cake walk for us to, maybe not by bow, but we'd get those bruisers to. Picture what it would be like if you and your wife had 5,000 acres to hunt, can you imagine.

[Bear55]

What I didn't point out was I hunt in a part of the state with plenty of deer. In fact, we can purchase at least 2 management tags - perhaps more - I don't know because I've never bought one.

But my point is there are a lot deer and a lot of cover. I get the impression from some on here that 95% of the bucks in this state are in somebody's cross hairs at some point during the season. I just don't feel that's the case. I think plenty of bucks make it through the season relatively unscathed.

I wish this were true Getanet. I hunt the bigwoods, nothing but cover and there are a few nice bucks that make it through each season but most of the young bucks still get slaughtered. To start off the 16 day season might be too long, I really don't see anything wrong with a 9 day season. Even with all the cover in the world these young bucks are full of testosterone and they are on the move all the time, eventually they walk past the wrong stand and that is the last we see of them. Later in the season when they learn to lay down or get shot guys are usually doing drives and that takes care of a lot more of them. I spend a lot of time in woods ever fall and I like to pass up all 1.5 and 2.5 year old bucks, I pass on 10-15 yearlings for every 2.5 year old eight pointer that walks by me, those numbers have been pretty consistent over the years.

[CSTPETER]

How many deer a year do you see CSTPETER? I was only able to hunt 5 days last year. I saw one deer, a doe, which I took. If it would have been a buck - big or small, I likely would have done the same. But I would hardly characterize that as being a game hog.

Getanet, My intent is not to paint everyone with the same broad brush and I'm certainly not calling everyone who shoots a deer for meat a game hog. I do it every year.

To answer your number question; I don't keep a log of my deer hunts but I would estimate that through archery and rifle season I see close to 125-150 deer and maybe have real shot opportunities at 25-30. Of those opportunities last year I took 2 does archery and 1 doe rifle hunting. I had one encounter with a mature buck that led to a marginal shot that I did not take. the rest of my shot opportunities were probably split 3 to 1 in favor of does and fawns VS 1.5. and 2.5 year old bucks. I hunt both private and adjoining public land. The problem is The deer that I let walk on private ground are the same ones that get hammered on the adjoining public ground during rifle season. And I mean hammered...you literally cannot walk more than 100 yards on some of the public ground w/o seeing a guy in a tree. Although it might seem farfetched to some, My guess is that nearly 100% of the yearling deer are at one time or another in someones crosshairs. Nearly everyone feels like if they don't shoot the deer 1st, the next guy down will, so the majority of these little guys get smoked. It's truly a vicious cycle. I've talked to these guys until I'm blue in the face about let em go let em grow but it hasn't made a difference. The real kicker is when you go and have a beer with these guys and they complain about never seeing a trophy while at the same time they've got 5 or 6 little guys hanging on the meat pole!

[Getanet]

If the majority (95%) of the little guys get smoked and there are no big buck around how is the population of the deer herd so high? Octo-Does?

Just kidding and just stirring the pot.

I think I've said my peace on this topic. I do appreciate the civilized differences of opinion. For or against AR & QDM I think the main point is we all care deeply about deer hunting.

[BobT]

Quote:

During the rut the does will seek out the mature deer with the largest racks because they are perceived to have superior genes and better health.

You have got to be a prodigy. I have never met or heard of anyone that can in all honesty know what a doe thinks. I suspect that it works just the opposite. I will agree that when more than one buck has a particular doe in mind, the one that bests the other will be the one to win the doe but I highly doubt the doe has much care about it. She'll mate with whichever buck she can and to the winner goes the spoils. The bucks are the ones preventing each other from mating. The does aren't choosy. I can see that in our horses. When a mare comes into heat she teases all the studs, not just one. The studs will fight each other to get at the mare and the mare could give a rat's behind which one it it.

In all fairness I feel that I should state that to some degree I have been playing a devil’s advocate here. I don’t oppose the idea of promoting efforts to improve the so-called “quality” of the deer herd as QDM proponents support. I wish you all the luck but what it boils down to is a difference in the definition of the word “Quality” in QDM.

On the onset, I think we need to dispel a couple falacies. First, both sides of this issue hunt partially for the experience of the hunt. The process of the hunt is no more precious or deserved for trophy hunters than for meat hunters so let’s get that straight. Second, those that primarily hunt for meat are not out there butchering the herd with reckless abandon. Speaking from personal experience it is true that I’ll probably take the first worthwhile deer that gives me opportunity. My definition of worthwhile may differ from yours or the next guys. I get one 3-day weekend to deer hunt each year and where I hunt I’m lucky to get one opportunity so I’d better not look away from the gift if I want take home my prize. In our party and yes we do party hunt, once a deer has been taken by a hunter, that hunter is typically only trohpy hunting the rest of the time we are together. I'm not going to fill my brother's tag with a small doe.

Those that promote and spout the acronym QDM have been trying to do so on the premise that larger bucks or larger racks equals a healthier herd and if they had their way laws would be passed to achieve that end. Not only is that not necessarily true and possibly even totally false, it is also self-serving and unfair to the rest of the deer hunters.

Those that hunt primarily for the meat define “quality” in numbers and for the most part have been enjoying a time of prosperity so-to-speak. Quite different from what it was in the mid 20th century. Year after year the harvest speaks for itself with higher hunter success rates, generous limits (possibly too generous in some cases), and higher harvest numbers and despite that the deer herd continues to grow or at least sustain itself. If that doesn't describe a healthy herd then I don't know what does. Larger racks are our preference but not necessarily natures. In nature the goal is to be fruitful and multiply, not necessarily get larger unless getting larger serves the goal.

If we begin to work toward producing a better balance between both views, and I do understand and agree to a point, but how would we do so without creating a problem with an over-abundant herd, which we are very close to now and in some areas have already crossed that line? Anyone that doesn’t believe that should ask about deer snipers the DNR hires every year and intensive harvest.

We have intensive harvest areas because if we don’t disease, predation, and nuisance human interactions will grow. In fact, don’t those areas promote and require the extra deer be antlerless? Isn’t that promoting QDM for size by encouraging hunters to take does instead of bucks?

If QDM means promoting larger bucks and racks, do it by changing attitutudes, not laws. We have enough rules to work with without asking for more.

Bob

[candiru]

If QDM means promoting larger bucks and racks, do it by changing attitutudes, not laws. We have enough rules to work with without asking for more.

Bob

[Musky Buck]

Bob I hear ya but in one breath you say I have only 3 days to hunt, that's still an extra day compared to old zone 4A. In another breath it's about the abundance of deer and then you say I'm lucky to get 1 opportunity per season at a deer so I better not look away to get the prize then your parties mindset turns to trophy's. Over abundant herd. What is the definition of that ? I'm not sure I have seen an over abundant herd even though I live in what the DNR says is the highest pop. per sq. mile in the state. When it was high, I still found no dead ones or any sick or diseased looking animals and currently the population has been cut in half from the high number years in my area. Do we have any way of knowing how many antlerless tags are sold each season per doe permit zone ? I was thinking 5 doe tags x lets say half the rifle hunting crowd of 250,000, my math says that's 1.25 million. I know most don't do that but we could have as hunters enough tags sold each season to drop the whole works. Oops back to AR. If you want some more nice bucks around put a don't shoot yearling bucks in your hunting parties code of conduct and stop worrying about if the neighbor will blast them, heck go tell the neighbor this is the way we will move forward, maybe it would pressure that neighbor into changing his ways, pretty soon you'll have an area that has more larger bucks than in years previous. Are our rules really such a mess ? Know when the season is and shooting light, have a legal firearm and blaze orange from the waist up and you are set. Make sure you have a license and don't wait until the last minute to get it. Then take the book and insert home if you are interested in extra doe tags, find your doe permit zone again and see if and or how many you are allowed. Buying ahead of time then allows you to read the fine print of you want.

[Musky Buck]

Ok Ok Ok, times have changed. I think the AR thing some is that young bucks especially in the rut are to me the most vulnerable of all the deer. Doeheads bust me, fawns even seem intrigued by me, mature bucks aren't dummies. The young buck just keeps lookin and cruisin and sometimes doesn't even seem to care knowing something out of the ordinary is sitting up in that tree. Works in Hillview, works in my area, go see real estate for sale on here and you can view a few of my TCam bucks from our self induced AR/go-grow/or whatever you want to call it. I had 1 Tcam out for 2 weeks in the fall and 2 weeks in the spring. We didn't post the about 15-20 yearling bucks or some of the 2 1/2 8pter's. I certainly didn't capture all of the bucks in the area but was pleasantly surprised. Whatever the state decides to do is fine, but I do feel for the people that almost have little to no chance at a big buck next fall because there area gets hammered year after year and they already know this and unless those yearling bucks survive the season, they're counting on buck fawns to fulfill the void of antlered bucks for next fall.