Minn. could see antler-point restrictions in 2010

[Bear55]

Perhaps an area in which we could find some common ground would be to strongly discourage the harvest of fawns.

Many of you folks are in a twist about me shooting a forkhorn, but a good number of bucks get cracked before they get their first set of antlers. With the liberal use of management permits, I gotta believe that this is having an effect.

Now I'm not a liberal, so I'm not looking to force this on anyone, but wouldn't it be nice if the DNR put a statement in the regs urging discretion in the use of antlerless permits and encouraging hunters to use these permits to harvest adult does?

PEAT we finally found something to agree on. There is no doubt that the buck fawn population has taken a beating. We all know this is an easy mistake to make but really if you have a fawn within bow range or if you have a high powered scope on your rifle its pretty easy to identify these little guys. I would really like to see the elimination of party hunting for bucks and I would like to force guys who accidentally shoot a buck fawn to use their one and only buck tag on that deer. That should be punishment enough and really help save the buck fawn population. Once the buck tags become more valuable guys will start thinking twice about plugging anything they see. I also think a hefty 1-2K fine for shooting more than one buck a year would be a nice large number to deter someone. And finally I would even be in favor of a buck lotto because good hunting 3/5 years will always be better than poor hunting 5/5 years.

[PEATMOSS]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is a good idea, one that those of us that choose to can implement into our own hunting and can encourage others to do so. Just because an idea has merit does not mean it needs to become a law. What is with all you liberals?

[CSTPETER]

AArgh...Just when I thought we were getting somewhere!!

[slimngrizzly]

I think it should be illegal to kill any deer younger than 3 1/2 years old How do you think that would go over!?! LOL!

Its no wonder people get shot every year, and horses and llamas, and god knows what else.... too many people just see something and drop a bead on it and boom! Someone will have a tag right?

By forcing hunters to take one animal only (meaning get rid of party hunting) and accurately identify thier target (AR for example) would result in FAR less hunting accidents.

[CSTPETER]

Does anyone have any harvest info on the percentage of fawn bucks that get whacked in a year? I'd bet it's significant. I guess I would not be opposed to having to tag a Button Buck with a buck tag.

[PEATMOSS]

The number is significant. I took some time out from arguing with you folks to do some research. The DNR website has harvest data. I saw the alarmingly high number of buck fawns harvested and thought, wow if these little dudes didn't get shot, there would be more meat for me and more horns for my friends here. Seemed like a win/win situation.

So now we have a good idea that we seem to agree on, one that we could pretty easily implement amongst ourselves and then the whole liberal mindset jumps in and says we gotta make a law. ARGHHHH!

[mrklean]

Peat is coming to the darkside now

[slimngrizzly]

Well I agree with you here! There should be a buck tag and a doe tag, not antlered tag and antlerless. A buck is a buck whether its a day or 10 years old. That would be a big help right there! And make everyone a bit more cautious!

[Getanet]

CSTPETER - here's the data you're looking for, found on Page 11 of the 2006 Deer Harvest Report (not sure why 2007 & 2008 data isn't posted).

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/outdoor_activities/hunting/deer/2006_harvestreport.pdf

In 2006, across all forms of hunting, 28,246 male fawns were registered in MN. 95,695 adult males were registered.

[B. Amish]

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/outdoor_activities/hunting/deer/2007_harvestreport.pdf

54.6% of the fawn harvest in 2007 were males. I think that percentage is pretty consistant from year to year. It's a pretty even split, and I've also read that slightly more male fawns are born each year than female fawns... probably nature's way of compensating for the fact that bucks have a higher mortality rate.

[Getanet]

I wouldn't be opposed to using a buck tag on a button buck either.

[Musky Buck]

DaveT you are correct, our season length and additional muzzy hunting is just pressuring the pressured herd even more. We are all using the best equipment for the most part. I feel for the true die hard muzzy hunters who lost what was unique about it, the patience to forgo rifle season.

[BobT]

Quote:

My opinion is none of this stuff would be necessary if we went back to what we had 10 or 15 years ago. That is, less seasons, shorter seasons and less tags.

The reason we had those more conservative hunting regs was out of necessity to protect the herd from over-harvest due to a lack of total deer herd size.

Today's deer herd is one of the largest ever for a number of reasons including mild winters and management practices. With the deer population as high as it is, we aren't depleting the resource with the harvest to dangerous levels. The deer herd has been maintaining population quite well. So well in fact that our harvest restrictions have been getting more and more liberal each year. Deer herd size is not the purpose of AR. Rack quality and gender balance are more likely the objective.

[candiru]

The regulations in these neighboring states have been around longer than the concept of growing antlers or QDM. They do what works for them. The lotteries in the Dakotas are for buck and doe. The success rate out there is 75-80%. If everyone had an either sex tag not enough does would be killed. At times there were more hunters than deer. They also have to manage by species with mule deer. EAB in Wis was a tool used to up the doe kill. Many Wis. hunters have a moral issiue with killing does - not a problem in MN. Iowa has had a Dec. season since before the concept of QDM. I am not sure if Iowa's lottery applies to residents.

[Trout_Slayer_77]

Nicely said candiru. EAB here in WI has absolutely nothing to do with increasing the number of mature bucks. There are many people here that absolutely refuse to shoot does and the population in some areas was getting so high that the DNR decided to use EAB to force people to shoot a doe. I still know people that refuse to shoot does which is why road kill has become a very hot commodity! Trust me, may people here, especailly the "trophy hunters" hate EAB!

I grew up in southern MN and hunt near New Ulm. Many times it has been said here that why not just shoot does instead of small bucks. Well the problem is we are lucky to get 3 or 4 does tags for 9 guys. Most of the area we hunt does not have high deer populations (crop land) but we are lucky enough to hunt along the MN River and have a very healthy deer population. My uncle has a produce farm and the deer do a lot of damage to his crops so we would love to shoot more does but because the deer management area as a whole does not have that many deer, few doe permits are given out. If AR's are put in place then there will do more deer costing him money. Remember the true reason for hunting is not to have tons of monster bucks running around but to control the population. I don't think if many of your paychecks were being affected by the number of deer out there that you would want AR put in place because it will increase overall deer numbers.

[PEATMOSS]

AArgh...Just when I thought we were getting somewhere!!

We are, I'm going to drop a line to the DNR as well as the MDHA office here in town. I'm astounded by the button buck kill and will be doing what I can to get the word out. Anyone have an "in " with any of the major outdoor writers? It'd be nice to see this issue get more ink.

[PEATMOSS]

oops, did that wrong^^^

[vister]

WOW, i don't believe we are finally all starting to agree on something. aside from the fact it isn't AR. but yeah, why not have to tag a button buck with a bucktag? only problem, trying to identify if it is indeed a nubbin buck.

to simplify it, how about an over'the'counter tag for nubbin bucks, just in case. this way, you don't burn your buck tag thinking it was a doe. you could make them say 15 bucks before the season, or 30 bucks after the kill. in a sense, kind of a fine to the hunter, but at least it can be legally tagged and not left to lay for the crows.

as far as the rare antlered doe, that should require a buck tag, as infact, the almost sure reason that doe was harvested was because visually, it was a buck.

[PEATMOSS]

Peat is coming to the darkside now

We should be on the same side. I may not be as obsessed with antlers as some of you, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see more too.

Where we have parted company is in how we get there. I believe free men in a free country have not only a right, but also an OBLIGATION to work out solutions to our issues without running to the government for more laws and regulations. It's ironic how some folks detest liberalism until it suits their purposes. With respect and perhaps a good bit of patience, maybe we can all get/keep what we want.

[CSTPETER]

The regulations in these neighboring states have been around longer than the concept of growing antlers or QDM. They do what works for them. The lotteries in the Dakotas are for buck and doe. The success rate out there is 75-80%. If everyone had an either sex tag not enough does would be killed. At times there were more hunters than deer. They also have to manage by species with mule deer. EAB in Wis was a tool used to up the doe kill. Many Wis. hunters have a moral issiue with killing does - not a problem in MN. Iowa has had a Dec. season since before the concept of QDM. I am not sure if Iowa's lottery applies to residents.

Killing the right amount of does is actually a major QDM principle, Just as important as not killing the majority of Bucks before they hit 2.5.

[Musky Buck]

Maybe this is out there and I'm unaware, but I'd like to see a breakdown of deer registered actually killed by each day of the gun season. I don't know what % are not registered. I'd like to see a breakdown assuming it must dwindle as hunters dwindle and are tagless etc. I sometimes wonder if we had the right recipe talking old zone 4.

[Bear55]

WOW, i don't believe we are finally all starting to agree on something. aside from the fact it isn't AR. but yeah, why not have to tag a button buck with a bucktag? only problem, trying to identify if it is indeed a nubbin buck.

to simplify it, how about an over'the'counter tag for nubbin bucks, just in case. this way, you don't burn your buck tag thinking it was a doe. you could make them say 15 bucks before the season, or 30 bucks after the kill. in a sense, kind of a fine to the hunter, but at least it can be legally tagged and not left to lay for the crows.

as far as the rare antlered doe, that should require a buck tag, as infact, the almost sure reason that doe was harvested was because visually, it was a buck.

I don't know that sounds too much like we have it now with bonus tags, just a little different process. I say 1 buck tag and that is it, if you mess up you are done buck hunting. People will learn real fast. As soon as guys can't get tags from their friends and family that one tag suddenly becomes more valuable and you will see people think twice before pulling the trigger.

[Musky Buck]

Bear, that's what our group did in 1995, we have 23 hunters, we can each only shoot our own buck and on certain relatives land we have our own rules, on mine it's 3 1/2 year old buck or doe or doe fawn, you can't control the trigger and drop something else you are done, guess what, no one has, it forces all of us to be certain, my uncle D's land it's the same. Other uncles set up how they want there land hunted, they live there so they know what's around, too many does and we make drives until we have what we should take, too few does and we put in longer amounts of time in our stands hoping for the big boy and don't do drives on those less deer years.