Antler Point Restrictions

[PEATMOSS]

I hunt in the northwoods near the edge of Chippewa National Forest.This is where I live.My hunting party consists of myself, 2 kids, my brother and usually a friend or 2 that come up to stay with us. I own no real acreage.

Near my home is a 40 ac. piece of state forest land, 80 acres of timber co woods and I have permission to hunt the private 50 acres next to my home.

When we started hunting this area about 5 years ago, there was a party of 5 from the cities that hunted the timber co. 80. My neighbor also hunted this piece. I only hunted that piece midweek when the folks from the cities went home and usually picked up 1 deer here. The 40 acres of state land we have pretty much had to ourselves as well as the private 50. Last year, the timber co decided to lease out the 80 and the folks from the cities scooped up the lease and posted it.FYI even if given the opportunity,I could not justify paying hunderds of dollars to hunt deer.My neighbor, having nowhere else to hunt has started hunting the state 40 we do and I can no longer hunt the 80 midweek.

Also in my area is another fellow. He reminds me alot of some of the guys posting on this thread. He's got a nice 120 ac piece of 50 yr old timber. He's a nice enough guy and has even allowed me to come onto his property to do some wood cutting. He's cleared about 10 acres of this land and through a lot of work and $$$ has cultivated some incredible foodplots. What a smorgasboard! He's got everthing from rapeseed and clover to turnips and even a pumpkin patch. Now I know that in many parts of the state foodplots are only marginal at attracting deer, but a feast like this up here in the middle of timber country is like a magnet in drawing deer. With a couple of swamps and ample thick cover, the deer don't wander too far once the crops ripen. This guy also pulls a small plow thru the turnips right before deer season exposing them for easier eating.

Like alot of you folks, this guy is an AVID hunter. He bowhunts,rifle hunts and usually buys a muzzi permit too. His hunting party for that 120 consists of himself, his brother and his nephew. During the entire rifle season, they hunt big bucks only. They refuse to shoot does during this time because they don't want to spook their deer off into the neighborhood. And yes, they do harvest some pretty impressive bucks.

During these last 5yrs, my group has managed to shoot around 4-6 deer per year, although it dropped to 3 last yr.. We all pass on fawns and all shoot any adult deer we see. Our harvest varies from year to year, but overall it has been a pretty even ratio of bucks and does.We really,truly don't see that many does. My friends from the south always take one deer home to split between them as this is all the meat they care for. My family and I process the remaining deer ourselves here at home. We cut roasts and chops and grind everything else into burger. We send nothing to a processor. No beer sticks or other treats. Venison is the staple of our diet. We all like it and it is much leaner and more nutritious than beef or pork.

Like everyone, deer hunting is a total experience for us, from the fine meals, the comradderie, storys past, working together as a family to process our harvest etc....it is a unique and wonderful experience and a tradition I don't wish to see altered.

Now if AR is put into place it WILL significantly alter deer hunting for my family and friends. The bucks in my area generally need 3 1/2 years to become 8-pointers.Now IF a buck survives our winters and IF it doesn't get hit by a car and IF it doesn't get eaten by wolves it is now a very wise animal and significantly more difficult to hunt for my antsy teenagers and none too sharp friends. It is also much more likely to be located where there is a significant number of does, like for instance a freshly turned up turnip field!

When I made a comparison of PETA and the gungrabbers a couple days ago, I actually felt a little bad, but I've gotten over it.

You see, most people see PETA for what it is, a bunch of fanatics. The gungrabbers will always have the constitution to contend with.(I'm still keeping my eye on them though). But my own brethren, my fellow hunters, have begun to take the heritage that I so truly love and alter it in ways that I find most disturbing.

I too like big bucks, but putting a head on the wall is way down my list of what makes deer hunting great.The laws being proposed by the "quality" crowd will make it more difficult for me to put meat in my freezer so that others can put a head a head on their wall. It will make it more difficult for me to keep my kids interested in the sport.(I see no way these laws will be age dependant).

SIMPLY PUT, THESE REGULATIONS WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO:1- THOSE THAT HUNT ON MARGINAL AND PUBLIC LAND 2-THOSE THAT ARE NOT AMONG THE VERY SKILLED HUNTERS THAT CAN CONSISTANTLY MATCH WITS OLDER WISER BUCKS.

IT WILL BENIFIT THOSE THAT OWN AND/OR HAVE ACCESS TO HIGH QUALITY PRIVATE LAND AND THOSE BLESSED WITH THE TIME,FINANCES AND FAMILY SITUATIONS THAT ALLOW THEM TO BECOME SKILLED ENOUGH TO HUNT THESE ELUSIVE ANIMALS.

QDM is far different from walleye slots.Walleye slots were designed to protect the prime breeding females, thus making the species more abundant for everyone. In this scenario, everyone sacrifices and benifits equally.

While I'm on a rant here, I can't quite understand why folks are willing to plop down obscene amounts of money to lock up these timber co. leases. These areas were not too long ago considered de-facto public land. Now they are locked up by one party, posted and off limits from Sept-Dec. It's sad that people seem to think that they can only have a quality hunt by keeping every other hunter out.Most of these leased areas really only get hunted the first 2 weekends then they become nothing more than a deer sanctuary.

Lastly, I've got some real mixed emotions on this foodplot phenomena. These products advertise that they "attract deer to your property" and where I live that's sure true. Now these deer that are attracted to someones property don't just materialize out of a stump, they come from somewhere else and if adequate cover is available they stay. Deer that were attracted from somewhere else are simply no longer there.Foodplots disrupt the natural distribution of deer in a given area. Now I'm not a huge proponent of baiting, but I find it bitterly ironic that one hunter can sit over a field of turned up turnips or a pumpkin patch and be considered both legal and ethical while a guy that dumps out an ice cream pail of grain by his stand is a poacher and a slob.

Some of you might label me a "meathunter". I think the term traditionalist is more accurate. I've always believed that we as hunters could work out our differences, but I'm seeing a growing sense of arrogance, selfishness and entitlement among many in our community. TO SHOOT OR NOT SHOOT SMALL BUCKS IS NOT A BIOLOGICAL QUESTION. IT IS A VALUE JUDGEMENT. I respect those that choose the challenge of hunting only for "quality" bucks.I admire the skills that many of you have acquired thru years of hard work.I respect your right to advocate your position and to attempt to persuede others. What I don't understand is how you have come to the conclusion that you are entitled to impose your values on others by force of law.

[skee0025]

Well said Peatmoss

[chub]

Agreed PEAT!

[Big Dave2]

Peatmoss, I agree with you 100%.

Thank you for eloquently stating my exact feelings on this issue.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Bravo, Peatmoss! I'm giving you a standing ovation in my head.

I can't agree with you more on all the issues you covered!

Meathunter is a horrible lable, I agree. I've always liked the term Traditionalist as well.

Unfortunately..... as I have learned in the past debating in these threads..... you're talking to a brick wall! No one is REALLY listening that doesn't agree!

It's a sad state of affairs that the hunting and angling public are at odds with each other all the time..........

[BobT]

Thank you, Pete.

Bob

[Jameson]

Peatmoss,

I don't think you meant to, but I think you just informed the world that your neighbor is baiting. In MN it is illegal to disrupt a foodplot in any way other than normal farming practices. Your neighbor is illegally hunting over unharvested turning up turnips.

Perhaps his "foodplots" would be less successful if he wasn't doing this illegal activity and the deer would not be as drawn to it as they currently are.

[96trigger]

I was wondering about the food plots myself, Sounded like baiting to me, but that is another topic completely.

[DaveT]

Peat

Well put. I agree with most of what you wrote. I think most of us here agree that the north woods and the prairie west is different from the rest of the state. When I started rifle hunting up there, you were lucky to see a deer and doe tags were coveted. I left 10 years ago and we were to a point where seeing a young buck or 2 every day was normal. However, I was also bowhunting the metro at that point and seeing 2 or 3 trophies during a season was also normal for that area. I did not have the skills to kill those bucks at the time, but I was seeing them. I decided then to devote my time to hunting the metro and other states that I had been hearing about from other bowhunters, and improving my skills (shooting, scouting, etc.). The numerous seasons and lengthening of seasons, muzzies that can shoot 300 yards, and buck party hunting during all of it in the metro has decimated the bucks to a point that you can't hardly find a mature buck, unless you are downtown St Paul, and I can't hunt there.

I love deer, I love the swollen necked, heavy horned, swaggering giants the most. I don't want antler restrictions, I don't think they are necessary, and I do believe 100 years of them would result in a lot of mature 6 point bucks, due to the best yearling bucks getting harvested, while the worst get a free pass. I would probably accept antler restrictions because it makes no difference to me, personally. I'm not going to shoot any yearling, no matter how many points he has.

I'm sorry that Potlatch leased out the ground you used to hunt, but they own it and aren't obligated to let you hunt there. Don't blame the guy from the city who leased it, he simply wants a place to enjoy his hunting, too. This is America, a country based on a free market. Supply and demand, Potlatch is finally doing what the timber companies down south have been doing for decades. I spent last weekend in Kansas, Missouri, and Iowa, 3 states that have been kicking our butts in trophy production for the last 10 or 20 years. I got free permission to hunt over 3000 private acres in those states, in 1 weekend. If you want something, go get it. Need a new place to hunt because the timber company leased out the land you used to hunt? Quit complaining and go find some. It's there. I've mucked stalls, ran fence, fixed plumbing to get and keep permission to hunt.

Here's the difference between food plots and baiting. Baiting requires minimal investment and even less work. 50 bucks will get you 500 pounds of corn, 1 dollar will get you the gas to deliver it to your stand site with your 4 wheeler.

Your neighbor cleared 10 acres, how long did that take? How much equipment did he use? Then he presumably spread a lot of lime and fertilizer to get the soil to a place where it could grow something, possibly for 2 or 3 years. How much did he pay for that lime and fertilizer? How much roundup did he buy to kill the weeds in his new plot? Then he worked the ground over to prepare it for the seed that he bought. How much fuel has he burned? My guess is he's got 10 grand invested in that food plot, plus another 500 hours of labor, sweat and blood. Not to mention the fact that his food plot helps get your deer herd through the winter fat and sassy.

There's a big difference between food plots and baiting.

I've been vocal on this thread not because I want to cram antler restrictions down your throat, but because this thread has the most activity. All I want to see is no more buck party hunting, for reasons I have stated numerous times. I would love another week to bowhunt the rut before the woods turn blaze orange, but won't be that dissapointed if that doesn't change, because I have other states I can escape to. My contention all along is we can all have what we want. With a tiny bit of restraint, we can save 30% of our bucks every year, that will increase the number of mature bucks, so you can still kill whatever you want and I might actually have a real chance at a nice buck.

Peat, I understand where you're coming from, I really do. But eliminating buck party hunting is not going to affect you much at all, in fact, it may improve your hunting on marginal or public land because your neighbor can't fill 4 or 5 tags, leaving you with nothing to shoot.

[96trigger]

DaveT, I agree with you on most, and Peat I hear what you are saying. I am not really in favor of AR, I don't think its the answer, but wouldn't mind seeing an end to party hunting for bucks.

DaveT, just because A guy has the resources and the will to put in the plot, doesn't make baiting OK. Personally, I would turn him in. Guys like him give food plots a bad name, and ammunition to those that want to see them banned.

[Musky Buck]

I'm with all of you believe it or not. Half the AR thing is many of us are tired of the guys and gals that pile up every buck they can get a fair shot at. Definitely get rid of buck party hunting first. Then we need to analyze the effectiveness of it and hopefully that would do it. I hear ya on the money thing, but as ACDC sings...Money Talks and unfortunately that leaves most of us out of the conversation.

[DaveT]

If turning up the turnips is illegal, then I'm against it. I read right through that part and didn't catch it. We are only seeing much success with clover, even that isn't much of a draw during the fall, when there's corn and beans everywhere.

[96trigger]

I would imagine a turnip plot in Northern Minnesota would be a major attractant. Down here in SEMN, they prefer the corn, alfalfa and clover. Really no need for food plots.

[Musky Buck]

I am aware of a food plot that was meant for deer, lately it has been covered with turkeys and a few pheasants scratching to. The deer are just starting to hit it again and I bet they appreciate finding something green to eat at this time of the year.

[Ice Chicken]

Maybe I should have given a little back ground on how I hunt and what I am seeing. Between our hunting party and the one down the road there are 12 hunters. Out of those 12 only 2 will shot does. I am one of of the 2. In the last 20 years I have shot 2 bucks not small ones and the rest of the deer have been does. No one shoots the small bucks but you have 10 guys all trying to take the big boys which is fine with me if that is what they want to do. But then why should any one be surprised in a drop in the number of nice bucks? Was kind of wondering if any one else has seen this in there area? So I am asking those in favor of AR which would lead to a restriction on what people will be able to shoot on the lower end of the buck population just what on the upper end are you willing to give up? Nothing? Or maybe once you have taken say a 10 pointer or bigger you could not take another one for 5 to 10 years therefor giving your fellow hunters a chance at a nice buck? Or would something like that not fly? After all asking one group of hunters to give up something with nothing in return doesn't quit seem fair does it? Or maybe to some it does. By passing up legal bucks is not giving up anything in my opinion because they are legal to shoot aren't they?

[james_walleye]

Hey Peatmoss, AR would be a forced selective harvest reg just as walleye slots are. Walleye slots were put in place to benefit the fisheries and since the DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for "trophies", AR would be put in place for the benefit of the age structure of the deer herd.

Answer this question peat, or anybody. The DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for trophies, they have stated this many times. Why then are they kicking around these ideas? Could it be because they possibly realize there is an issue

The issue of the age structure in our buck population isnt biological?? What is it then?

[Bear55]

Good post PEAT. Again I will say I'm not really for AR and would prefer no party hunting for bucks. Like others have said, plowing the turnups just before the season certainly sounds like an illegal move that give them an unfair advantage. Aside from that can you really blame the guys buying and leasing up land, its the way the hunting world is going like it or not. It could also be a byproduct of the poor hunting we have, guys want to manage their own land for betting hunting and they have every right to do that.

As for not liking the term "meat hunter" or for those saying its like talking to a brick wall don't make ma laugh. You meat hunters or traditionalist have plenty of names for us QDM guys and certinaly have an equal if not greater brick wall mentality so please save it.

[certified jumbo]

still good conversations guys. i would say we all have different idea's and thoughts and certianly there is nothing wrong with that. in time, we are going to see some changes in laws. it probably won't be this year, maybe the following year or years down the road. i don't know, but change is coming. a good start i think many of us agree, would be banning party hunting for bucks. it certianly seems logical from most perspectives. then lets see where that takes us.

secondly, i see some conversion on potlatch land. at first i was dissappoited when i saw they were leasing thier lands. but after crunching some numbers. this was a great deal. we lease a 180 potlatch for around 1200. we have 6 guys, thats only 200 bucks a guy a year. if you owned it yourself, you'd pay more in taxes!!! in the big picture of deer hunting and land, thats incredibly cheap beyond belief.

[RuttenBuck]

Peat -

I understand your concerns especially about losing access to hunting land. Like it or not, this is way hunting has become and will only continue down this path. I would suggest like other people have mentioned to try and get a group together and find a lease for yourself. Also, there is still private land out there that does not get hunted and I'm sure if you looked hard enough, you would be able to find something.

I do disagree with you though on your assumption it takes 3.5 years for most deer in your area to get 8 pts. I would be willing to bet a very large percentage are at this point by 2.5 years of age. It is unfortunate that we have to try to impose regulations to balance the herd when hunters like yourself do take a fair share of both bucks and does. You are not the cause of the un-natural buck to doe ratio we have. It is the hunters who think they need to shoot a buck no matter the size and have been doing this since the days they have probably started hunting. I agree with most that AR is not our best option and would rather see less imposing regulations as no more buck party hunting and moving the season back, but would take AR if it came down to it. I also think hunters over-react and claim we are taking away chances for their success only to improve our own. Yes, their may be a season or two where we harvest less deer (bucks) because of additional restrictions but that will only increase EVERYONE'S odds in the following years. More bucks equals a more intense rut which leads to more daytime activity which makes for a more eventful and successful hunt. There is nothing better than hearing a buck crashing through the swamp chasing a doe.

I wish you luck in your quest to find hunting land along with others in your situation and hope as hunters we can agree to meet in the middle somewhere.

[propster]

Ice, I think you answered your own question. You shot 2 good bucks in twenty years. I don't think we have to worry too much about too many people killing a big one every year. But it sure would be nice to see more of them, and that would allow all of us to be more selective.

[BobT]

One question that seems to keep coming up in my mind with regard to party hunting bucks is this. What reason would a group of hunters have for specifically targeting multiple young/small bucks rather than taking a combination of bucks and does? You make it sound like they are out there on a shooting range with bucks and does pacing back and forth in front of them and they are on some kind of shooting rampage targeting the bucks only.

If a hunter is not interested in the size or age of his target, wouldn't it be just as likely he or she would take a doe as a buck? I don't understand.

Like in our party, we don't specifically target bucks. We'll take a doe if we're licensed to do so just as easily as a buck. In fact, a doe typically provides much nicer cuts of meat in my opinion.

Bob

[Bear55]

BobT

Some hunters have been raised on shooting bucks and letting does live to help the population. Its been this way for so long that I think its in their dna. I hunt with a couple of guys that alwasy manage to pass up a bunch of does and shoot a small buck, or a doe and a young buck come in and they shoot the buck even though they have a doe tag in their pocket. Some years they take multiple small bucks. They do shot does from time to time but only when they don't have an opportunity to shoot a buck. I have tried everything I can think of to get them to shoot a does instead but its no use.

You also have to take into consideration that these young bucks are always on the move this time of year, they lack the experience to survive and are very vulnerable to a hunters bullet. I don't know how many times I have heard of guys taking a shot and the young buck just stands there waiting for another bullet to come flying his way.

The whole shoot any buck mentality has been burned into the brains of these hunters be cause that is the what the regulations have allowed them to shoot for so long. Until we change up a few laws or educate these people not much will change. Education seems like it would be easy, but that is hardly the case.

Us QDMers guys are really not out to take your deer away. We have experience the thrill of encountering or shooting a mature buck and we would love to share that experince with others. I honestly get just as excited when someone else in our party takes a nice buck as a do when I shoot one. Its something a yearling buck just can't provide unless you are a young or new hunter, and we are certainly not against young or new hunters shooting anything they want. Any change to the buck party hunting laws is going to benefit all hunters, not just the die hard QDM guys, just imagine if one dear season an extra 5 or 10 thousand hunters shot the biggest buck of their lives. Wouldn't those experiences be much more enjoyable for them and the future of hunting then some guy shooting is 40th or 50th yearly buck in half that many years?

[propster]

You hit it on the head Bear. Bob, not all are at least somewhat selective like your crew. As Bear said, there are many, many out there, my dad included until we started to expose him to a different way of looking at it, and now he even passes smaller bucks; who look down on shooting does but think nothing of popping the first scrub that comes along and are very proud of it. Now that to me is fine - once a year. It's the guys who shoot that one, and then their nephew's, and then their cousin's, until they've piled up a few of them, and for what?

[Big Dave2]

How about we get back on track here. This thread is about antler restrictions, not party hunting, moving the season out of the rut or baiting vs. food plots.

If you get right down to it and YOU had to vote on an antler restriction of lets say 4 points on each side, would you vote yes or no?

[Big Dave2]

Hey Peatmoss, AR would be a forced selective harvest reg just as walleye slots are. Walleye slots were put in place to benefit the fisheries and since the DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for "trophies", AR would be put in place for the benefit of the age structure of the deer herd.

Answer this question peat, or anybody. The DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for trophies, they have stated this many times. Why then are they kicking around these ideas? Could it be because they possibly realize there is an issue

The issue of the age structure in our buck population isnt biological?? What is it then?

They are kicking around these ideas because of public opinion. I don't think it has much to do with science or we would already have these regulations in place.

[PEATMOSS]

Hey Peatmoss, AR would be a forced selective harvest reg just as walleye slots are. Walleye slots were put in place to benefit the fisheries and since the DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for "trophies", AR would be put in place for the benefit of the age structure of the deer herd.

Answer this question peat, or anybody. The DNR doesnt manage our deer herd for trophies, they have stated this many times. Why then are they kicking around these ideas? Could it be because they possibly realize there is an issue

The issue of the age structure in our buck population isnt biological?? What is it then?

As I understand them, walleye slots were put into place to protect the prime breeding females, thereby increasing the overall population. .In this scenario, everyone sacrifices and gains equally. As I stated in previous posts, the desire for more large antlered deer is a social, not biological consideration. I think I made a reasonable case in my longwinded post that this will have a much more lopsided sacrifice/gain depending on which side you're on.

C,mon guys, my argument isn't that my way or your way is better. It's about choice. I RESPECT THE CHOICE YOU HAVE MADE AND I RESPECT YOUR RIGHT TO ATTEMPT TO PERSEUDE OTHERS. BUT WHAT MAKES YOU FOLKS SO DOGGONED DETERMINED TO FORCE, BY LAW YOUR VALUES ON THE REST OF US???

[PEATMOSS]

How about we get back on track here. This thread is about antler restrictions, not party hunting, moving the season out of the rut or baiting vs. food plots.

If you get right down to it and YOU had to vote on an antler restriction of lets say 4 points on each side, would you vote yes or no?

I had a real slow night at work the other night and kinda went off on a big rant. I think I more or less spun this thread 9 different directions.My bad.

[propster]

Good point Peat, but in a way I guess many of us feel that your values are currently forced by law onto us. Remember, slavery and lots of other things used to be "legal" in this country until somebody's "values" started a movement to change the law. Now don't everybody get your undies in a bunch - I'm not comparing slavery to shooting deer, just pointing out how many laws get made or changed. And I would say we're just arguing on the internet, not trying to force our values on anyone, though we probably are trying to get others to see things from a different perspective, just as you are.

[skee0025]

f you get right down to it and YOU had to vote on an antler restriction of lets say 4 points on each side, would you vote yes or no?

No

[skee0025]

Good point Peat, but in a way I guess many of us feel that your values are currently forced by law onto us.

Not even close..If the deer isnt up to your standards dont pull the trigger, no one is forcing you to. But to pass a law saying I cant pull the trigger because the deer in my sights isnt up to your standards................

Just so my position is clear. Since I got out of the Service in 1998 I have taken 1 Buck and the rest were does. I hunt Wisconsin and Minnesota. The one buck I chose to take was a big bodied 6. From what I've seen QMD'ers advocate I would not have been "allowed" to shoot that buck because it didnt meet their "standards".