Minn. could see antler-point restrictions in 2010

[CSTPETER]

Originally Posted By: PEATMOSS

CSTPETER,

Other timberland has been leased and posted. I lost my best bear stand on leased land. The land directly next to my in-laws has been posted.My kids can't even go out for a dang walk in the woods at Grandma's because someone decided that they needed exclusive rights to a forest that had been shared forever. The wealthier folks up here are planting turnips and rapeseed in the middle of their property to attract more deer....

Let's turn MN in to a "GO TO" Trophy deer destination and you'll see what posting, leasing..... outfitting and greed is all about.

Just one more step towards the slope of turning hunting into a sport for the privileged, IMO.

Some questions I have for the "trophy" hunters are, what will you have if you achieve your goals?

A more satisfying hunt? A better photo with your kill? Nicer trophy wall? Then once you realize the guy you work with, your neighboor, your cousin Johnny and countless others have the same caliber of "trophy", will you regard yours with the same esteem? Where do you go once the "shine" wears off and tomorrows trophy becomes no big deal?

What then?

Maybe if the state played it's management cards right, public ground would be just as appealing as private ground and the demand for our own privately funded deer paradise would dwindle. We can dream, right?

One thing that MOSSY did touch on is the fact that there is a lot more pressure out there at least where I hunt. Even if we all wanted to hang on to our traditional hunting areas we couldn't due to increased pressure. I miss the days when I could walk a public 80 and see maybe one other hunter, now I walk the same 80 and see 4 or 5 hunters. Is that supposed to appeal to me?

Many of you lament that new restrictions will keep some hunters out of the woods, and then turn around and complain about all of your lost hunting ground/ opportunity. You can't have it both ways guys. My take is if your not serious enough about hunting to follow some rules then maybe you should stay home. That way guys like MOSSY can enjoy their Idyllic days of yore without any change and won't have to worry about new hunters encroaching on their territory. I don't feel one bit of regret for spending a few dollars to extricate myself and my kids from the downward spiral that public ground hunting has become.

[chub]

That way guys like MOSSY can enjoy their Idyllic days of yore without any change and won't have to worry about new hunters encroaching on their territory. I don't feel one bit of regret for spending a few dollars to extricate myself and my kids from the downward spiral that public ground hunting has become.

Nor do I. But the flipside is, the more economic gain to be made, (i.e. trophy hunting), the more those with the wherewithal will be willing to buy, lease or control more land, thus keeping the "average Joe" confined to public land, or giving up the sport. Maybe they're poor examples, but look to South Dakota and the Pheasant industry, or pretty much all of the south for Waterfowl and much other hunting, Texas for Deer, the East Coast... etc. Guess I don't fault the landowners for wanting to make a dollar, but in my eyes, that's where hunting is heading.

Each step that's taken to add "value" to hunting,(attempting to turn MN into a trophy destination for example), just speeds this process along.

[Bear55]

BTW, I'm still waiting for any of you folks to answer the question, if so many folks REALLY want this, then why would we need to change the laws?

PEAT

We have about 500,000 deer hunter who harvest around 250,000 deer. So about half of us shoot a deer, but more than likely a smaller group of hunters shoot multiple deer a year so lets say 40% of deer hunters shoot a deer in a given year. Now if you have half the hunters across the state passing up little bucks, the other half can easily clean up a majority of those young bucks. There is also a large number of hunters afraid to pass up anything because they know the neighbors are going to shoot anything they let walk.

As soon as we started passing young bucks about 5-6 years ago our neighbors success rates started to climb. We still do it because we believe its the right thing to do, but some hunters don't have the will power to let one walk even thought they want to and know the benefits.

[JeffB]

I think it might be a good thing. It seems like I always end up shooting a 3x3 or 4x4 buck because its all I ever see in my area. I would gladly pass up the 3x3 buck if I knew others would do the same.

[Getanet]

I've bumped heads with few guys on AR/QDM on various threads on this site. My view has come from being absolutely against them, to feeling it may be necessary in certain pockets of the state where the deer population is really hurting.

I've concluded that none of us really knows what will happen in MN if AR is put into effect. One guy says it will help the health of the herd, the next guy says it will hurt it by allowing genetically inferior bucks to breed. Until its tested here we're all guessing.

However, I also subscribe to the law of unintended consequences, and whenever you put regulations into effect there will be unforeseen changes. Hopefully they won't be negative consequences.

[BobT]

Quote:

We still do it because we believe its the right thing to do, but some hunters don't have the will power to let one walk even thought they want to and know the benefits.

Maybe will power doesn't fit the equation. Maybe their views are different and they don't believe it's the right thing to do. Maybe what they do is the right thing to do from their perspective but not yours just like your ideal may be the right thing to do from your perspective but not theirs.

Maybe they don't want to let them walk because they reap the benefits that meet their needs. What you see as beneificial for you may not matter to others and vise versa. Still sounds to me like the minority group desperately trying to impose their views and ideals upon the majority.

We have an agency or agencies that are assigned the task of managing our wildlife including game wildlife and if it was so bad for the herd I would suspect they would be working to change what we've been doing. Oh sure, cry foul and whine that they are only managing the herd for the money but if the majority of hunters believed the way you do, then the money would be in doing exactly what would please your views and we'd be happy for the MOST part.

As it is the majority of hunters apparently prefer to harvest game and rack size is a secondary concern.

[james_walleye]

CSTPETER- Ya, I got issues, but my therapist says if we tweak my meds another time or 2 I'll be doing fine.

What my "issue" really is, is where I see our heritage heading. I see AR as another kick to the head of both folks like me that hunt for more traditional reasons as well as the multitudes of individuals that you guys like to refer to as "weekend warriors".To many, deer hunting is now the only hunting they do.I know you guys are smart enough to understand that the restrictions you are advocating will disproportionally benifit the more avid hunters and those that own/have access to high quality private land.

We often point to Europe as an example of what can happen to gun rights. I'm pointing to Europe as an example of what will happen when hunting becomes over-regulated and too expensive. Every hunter that loses interest is one less license sold, one less voice in support of hunting and likely one less gun owner. The lack of concern for these facts is both selfish and shortsighted.

vister- truly if half of the folks in the state CHOSE to abstain from shooting smaller bucks there would be vastly more yearlings making it thru to the nexxt season.50% less people shooting yearlings and refusing to allow anyone else to fill their tag=many more deer getting thru to the next year. Simple math. Yes, the neighbor may shoot the particular buck you passed up, but then again he may not.

How is this going to disproportionally benefit more avid hunters and those that have access to high quality land???? You know what the problem is right now? Land access right now is a problem because people are buying up land and restricting access because its the only way they can ensure seeing anything more than a basket rack on a consistent basis. If AR is passed and more mature bucks are running around everywhere people will not have to be so restrictive on who they let hunt their land. Its exactly the opposite of what you are saying.

There is not a majority of people in MN saying they want change which is one reason why you should stop and think...why is the DNR doing this??!! They see the problem, they see the need for change. They realize that managing a deer herd based on tradition isnt doing justice to the deer herd itself. You don't manage a deer herd on public opinion and tradition, you manage the herd for the herd itself. A deer herd in which 90% of the buck harvest is 1 1/2 year olds is a complete joke and any wildlife biologist will tell you that. Why have a DNR if all you want to do is manage the herd based on tradition and public opinion? The DNR is doing its job by kicking these ideas into gear and actually managing the deer herd.

[vister]

you are right on bobt. however, everyone is just expressing their oppinions here. at least i know i am not forcing my ideas across the table, just making a few suggestions in the direction of how "I" feel AR could improve deer hunting.

Others are thinking in the exact opposite direction as I. Which is entirely up to them as "THEY" feel how AR regs are the last resort. heck, i'm all for AR, but some opinions here have made me wonder if i still 100% support it.

like said earlier, the victory and defeat stories at deer camp, and the stories told year after year, are the most important part of all outdoors. We should feel priviledged to get to do such a great thing year after year.

[Getanet]

JamesWalleye - you make sound arguments in a lot of your posts. But you don't honestly think AR is going to make people less restrictive of their private hunting land do you? Come on...

[Bear55]

JamesWalleye - you make sound arguments in a lot of your posts. But you don't honestly think AR is going to make people less restrictive of their private hunting land do you? Come on...

AR's or not land is going to be hard to come by in the future. Look at how much land has been developed in the past 30 years, now look 30 years down the road. If I had the $$$ I would lock up as much land as a could and I don't blame anyone else for doing the same thing. Now you can cry about how terrible things have gotten and what a sad state our hunting hertitage has become but times have changed, populations are growing and available land is shrinking. I hardly blame the lack of access on the hunting community, the guys who have a little vision can see land is already at a premium and it will only become more expensive down the road.

Everyone says they hunt for food but we all know its cheaper to buy your meat at the grocery store. Sure if the only money you spend is on shells, a license and gas to get to your location you are saving some $$$ but honestly how many of us only spend the bare minimum to deer hunt, maybe 1% or less? We spend $$$$ and lots of them because we love to hunt, just add up the guns, bows, camo, gas, shack, land, food, beer, campers, bullets, arrows, ect... I could go on and on. In a lot of ways hunting and fishing is already a rich mans sport, sure you can get by cheap but most all of us spend a lot of money on the outdoors and that isn't going to chance down the road. In my opinion it's money well spent.

[Musky Buck]

I hear how many feel many bucks would be left to rot. Do we really have that many slob hunters in our state ? If we do then shame on them and to the slobs please sell your rifle. It's time for some hunting groups (parties) to police your own group, stop the shooting early/late, baiting, tagging deer for others when you aren't actually "party hunting". AR let's try it, if it fails lets drop it, but the buck party hunting needs to be addressed, it's just too simple to get around the rules no matter what they are.

[james_walleye]

JamesWalleye - you make sound arguments in a lot of your posts. But you don't honestly think AR is going to make people less restrictive of their private hunting land do you? Come on...

Well Get i was out on my UPS route and i've talked to a few guys i know pretty well who own land here in zone 3. I got the same impressions of the situation from them reguarding AR. They gun hunt the 3A season and don't let anyone hunt the 3B season because they don't want the young bucks shot. A couple told me they want does shot but they won't let anyone out there as the seasons stand. But being the young bucks would for the most part be protected they would let a few people out that 2nd season. So come on...yeah it would help....and its not a hunch, its coming straight from a couple landowners here in the SE themselves.

[PEATMOSS]

Bear- the way I figure it, if half the hunters in the state chose to take a pledge to 1-not shoot any "immature" bucks and 2-refused to allow others to tag a deer for them then you would most certainly see many more bucks make it thru the season. I have no idea exactly how many more as there are certainly alot of variables. Would some of the deer that group A passed up be killed by folks in group B. Certainly. Other factors to consider are that group B are only going to be able to cross tag among other group B members. Further, I would guess that group A would be made up largely of the more avid and skilled hunters such as yourself.Group B would likely have a disproportionately high # of "weekend warriors" and the like, a far less skilled group and a group that certainly spends less time afield.

James- just because ther are more mature bucks around, doesn't mean that mature bucks are gonna become retarded.Mature bucks are a challenge even for seasoned hunters like yourself and will certainly be more difficult for younger and less avid hunters. QDM is based on lower #S of does and restrictions on shooting yearling bucks. These 2 groups comprise the vast majority of the harvest for the less seasoned hunter. Therefore, AR'S and other QDM practices will in fact provide greater opportunities for folks like yourself and diminished opportunities for hunters like my antsy teenage sons.

[Bear55]

I would like to think that and I'm sure the guys who are passing small bucks are making a difference but how much of a difference is anyone's guess. I'm sure some groups in small pockets are having luck but if half the guys in a given area are passing and half are shooting I don't think too many of the little guys are surviving. I really think you would need a majority of hunters in an area pass small bucks to make a difference, just a few hunters can do a lot of damage if they have the right stand and the right tags. Also don't be surprised to hear about neighbors and different parties sharing tags, I've seen it before.

You have to look at the the pressure these deer see every season. Opening week a majority of the young bucks get shot, after that the rut and deer drives cut down the survivors. These young bucks are on the move the entire fall, they are dumb, and even if half the guys in the state pass them up I still say almost all of them never see their 2.5 birthday. Here is one example, opening day a few years back 3 hunters from my party passed up the same odd looking spike opening day (two very tall spikes curling out, I had game cam pics to confirm this) I was the last to see him, 10 minutes later the neighbors got him. So 4 of us saw this same deer in the first 1.5 hours of the season. How many deer stands would this one young buck have walked by the rest of the day? or the season?

[Getanet]

I get your point Bear, but allow me to play devil's advocate. With AR, wouldn't that odd looking spike with inferior genetics be protected - free to breed with as many does as he can?

Doesn't that run counter to the idea of promoting a healthier herd? That's one of the main arguments against AR, and there does seem to be some logic to that line of thinking.

I realize you were using that deer as an example since it was so easily identifiable.

[buckhunter21]

Just because a deer has spikes is it really inferior? I dont know how many articles i have read in magazines on the subject but they all say the same thing, that a deer with spikes after a couple years will be just as big if not bigger than deer with multiple points their first year. Ive made this point before but how many 3.5+ year old bucks have you seen in this state that have a small racks? None here.

[Pickelfarmer]

Sounds like just one more instance of the Sqeaky wheel getting the grease. How many things in this world are going to get changed becuase of a loud and quite frankly, annoying minority????? I feel those that are pushing for this have only there intrests in mind and are using the Better managment tool as a crutch for there argument with no fact to back them up. Whats wrong with the deer heard that MN has? Theres healthy deer everywhere in MN and alot of them. Just because everybody and there 12 year old son/daughter doesn't shoot a trophy every year by stacking the deck in there favor we need to change the laws for them? I don't think so....

[james_walleye]

Bear- the way I figure it, if half the hunters in the state chose to take a pledge to 1-not shoot any "immature" bucks and 2-refused to allow others to tag a deer for them then you would most certainly see many more bucks make it thru the season. I have no idea exactly how many more as there are certainly alot of variables. Would some of the deer that group A passed up be killed by folks in group B. Certainly. Other factors to consider are that group B are only going to be able to cross tag among other group B members. Further, I would guess that group A would be made up largely of the more avid and skilled hunters such as yourself.Group B would likely have a disproportionately high # of "weekend warriors" and the like, a far less skilled group and a group that certainly spends less time afield.

James- just because ther are more mature bucks around, doesn't mean that mature bucks are gonna become retarded.Mature bucks are a challenge even for seasoned hunters like yourself and will certainly be more difficult for younger and less avid hunters. QDM is based on lower #S of does and restrictions on shooting yearling bucks. These 2 groups comprise the vast majority of the harvest for the less seasoned hunter. Therefore, AR'S and other QDM practices will in fact provide greater opportunities for folks like yourself and diminished opportunities for hunters like my antsy teenage sons.

OK, first of all QDM is different that trophy management. QDM is based on getting a buck past its first year while having the optimum amount of does around as well. When a buck is 2 go ahead and shoot him if you get the chance. Trophy management is about also letting 2 year old bucks go as well as culling down the doe herd as well. This is not what anyone is after.

AR will not diminish opportunities for your boys because there would be exceptions to the AR reguarding youth and seniors as i was told. AR would also not be forced upon areas where deer numbers are not at optimum levels. And if AR goes into effect in your area PEAT and one of your boys downs a great big 10 pointer and you see the glow on his face maybe you'll think differently.

[james_walleye]

Well pickel if you've read anything about the DNR they don't manage our deer herd for trophies meaning the reason AR are coming up is because they think biologically something needs to be done, not because myself or anyone else on this site wants something done.

Just because a single deer is healthy doesnt mean a herd is healthy. Any wildlife biologist will tell you that when 90% of the buck harvest is yearlings that something is seriously wrong with the age structure of the bucks within the herd. But again, i understand people don't care about that because it gets in the way of their tradition and they simply don't want someone telling them what they can and can't do. It basically comes down to this: do you think the deer herd should be managed by tradition and public opinion or by what a wildlife biologist would do. If you think public opinion than why are we wasting tax dollars paying a DNR and its biologists.

[52luge]

I think Picklefarmer has nailed it! Couldn't agree more.

Lets face it, we all want to be like Lee and Tiffany or the Drewry boys or whoever on T.V. We think that every year we should shoot a 140 class deer and anything else is a cull buck and anyone who shoots a basket 8 is a dink. Wake up. There is nothing and I mean nothing wrong with what Minnesota has. Example: A friend of mine has killed 4 Pope and young deer in the last 8 years. In Minnesota. Why? He hunts good land and he's a good hunter. His land is intensly hunted during the slug season with no reguard to rack size, but yet, he seams to find them. Find some good land and put in the time and there you go.

[james_walleye]

It seems as though the DNR doesnt think everything is alright in MN.....

[PEATMOSS]

Bear- have you talked to your neighbors??? have you tried to persuede them to your way of thinking??? is it just one group or all of your neighbors????

James- I've seen that glow, along with the eyes getting as big as pieplates, shaky hands and heavy breathing etc. I sat with both of my boys their first season hunting and witnessed their first deer. Both deer were what you guys call "scrubs". They were the two most beautiful deer I have ever seen. My boys are both into hunting, but with other activities and interests. I'm not sure they'd be so interested if they hadn't had that initial success.

[PEATMOSS]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think the DNR is reacting to the very vocal and well organized group you folks have put together down your way James. I read the interview than Lou Cornicelli gave Mn Outdoor News and I did not come away with the same impression you have.

[james_walleye]

and thats absolutely why there would be exceptions for youths within AR.

[james_walleye]

Don't kid yourself, the DNR isnt going to put regs like this in without themselves seeing a need for change. Yeah there are groups pushing for change, no doubt. But even though they see the need for change, it was the poll that was put out there showing 50% of the hunters would like to see more mature deer out there is what is opening the DNR up to doing this. Now lets not confuse this with 50% of the people practicing QDM, they simply just want to see a a few more mature deer. And to make this happen something needs to change. Missouri started out with 40% of the people in favor of AR and after 3 years it was close to 90%.