The gift of the deer tag vs trophy bucks

[BRULEDRIFTER]

So all we need is corn hu?

No, but it helps. As does great habitat that is not hevily pressured because it's locked up from public access.

If you want to take this and turn it into yet another QDM horse beat-down, go ahead. Not me!

The point of this post was to show how pointless it is to go the route of banning cross tagging to get to the QDM utopia. You guys constantly throw things out about how great all the other states are and then go on to basically say they are of superior intellegence then MN hunters..... In the end, what is the one common thread from the other states that differs from MN? Post-Rut hunting season!

In the end that's what your focus should be exclusively set on. Get the hunt out of the rut and leave the rest alone. Our terrible, sinful, satanic "meat-hunting" hunting parties can continue to help fill each others tags so we can get our flesh, and the God-like Bone collectors can have more bone to go around so they no longer have to put in the amount of time to actually hunt one down!

It's a compromise this evil meat hunter is willing to make!

[Bear55]

But they still get to party hunt and give the gift of a tag, right?????? That is, afterall, what the point of this whole post was about!

So why ban cross-tagging?

Like Trigger had mentioned earlier, cross-tagging was started because of very few doe tags and a very low deer population. It allowed people, many who depended on venison to have a better chance to bring some meat home. With MN deer population around a million deer according to the DNR its hardly needed any more.

I really see party hunting it as a way for someone to shoot multiple bucks for themselves or their group and take hunting opportunities away from other hunters or even hunters in their own group. You guys can glorify party hunting all you want but I don't see one guy shooting multiple bucks as part of our hunting heritage. A lot of us QDM guys get labeled as greedy hunters but honestly who sounds like the more greedy hunter, the guy who tagged 2 bucks in the past 10 years or the guy who won't share his best stand and shot between 10-20 bucks in that same time span?

[BRULEDRIFTER]

You're hung up on the bad apples that take advantage of the party hunt. Like I said earlier, passing a law isn't going to change that! It's a unenforceable law anyway. Just like everything else, the people that are going to do it will do it no matter what law is put in the books!

[LightningBG]

Another thing is. For those who are meat hunters and strictly meat hunters. They will just stay out there longer.

I've been in parties in other states where we were sitting there until everyone (just 3 of us for the last couple years) had a deer. Not my land, not my choice. (i guess I could have went without, but that was unlikely). Anyways. One of the guys is there for meat. He doesn't even really like personally taking a deer that I'm aware of, but he isn't going to go home until he has one. They rely on that food source throughout the year. So one year, opening morning 2 nice bucks walk up together towards my stand. I drop them both right there. Go grab my buddy, he's thrilled, we tag em, clean em. Third guy gets one before we're done cleaning and we're headed home by noon.

No matter if I would have shot it or him, it would have been shot sooner or later that week. It was just a matter of time spent on getting it done.

I guess what I'm trying to say it. Cross tagging doesn't always mean more deer are being taken, sometimes its the same amount in a shorter time.

[Getanet]

Here's something I haven't seen discussed. If we’re going to look at other state’s P&Y/B&C numbers as proof they have more selective hunters and better hunting traditions let’s also be clear that many of these states are full of private hunting preserves where you're all but guaranteed one of these deer for the low low price of $4-6K+. Below are direct quote I've found from some of these private preserves in various states such as Missouri, Iowa, Illinois and even WI that come right out and say nearly ever deer shot there goes into the books.

I would expect these states to have higher numbers of P&Y/B&C with all these private reserves dedicated to putting hunters within arms reach of a monster buck.

Missouri

•We have a minimum of 130" on our bucks.

•One out of every 5 hunters harvests a Boone and Crocket Class deer and 3 out of every 5 harvest at least a 150 inch deer.

•You can expect to see Deer in the 130 to 150 range often, with a chance to take bigger Deer in the 170 to 180'S.

Iowa

•150" minimum with a 90% opportunity rate.

Illinois

•Our opportunity rate at a pope and young class buck at 40 yards or less over the last 5 years is 80%

•85% of our hunters had an opportunity at a hunter estimated 150 class buck or better, inside of 20 yards at this time.

Wisconsin

•Normally a 145 to 150 class deer would sell for $4000 and a 160 to 169 deer would sell for $6,000. With this hunt, any deer can be shot for $4,000

•If you are looking for a Whitetail 110-220 green gross B.C. weighing 200-325 pounds give us a call.

[Bear55]

You're hung up on the bad apples that take advantage of the party hunt. Like I said earlier, passing a law isn't going to change that! It's a unenforceable law anyway. Just like everything else, the people that are going to do it will do it no matter what law is put in the books!

Yes lets give up on all game laws because people will do what they want anyway. There is no way for legal party hunting to be enforced now, do we really know if every party hunting shot deer was taken legally? I wonder how many times the hunter who's tag is used never leaves camp, I would be willing to bet it happens thousands of times. There is no way to enforce it either way so don't use that as an excuse.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Look, I know I'll never change your mind, and you'll never change mine. Deer hunting just means different things for us. Sure, I'd love to shoot a big buck, and I know I will someday, I'm sure it'll happen sooner then later as I mature as a hunter. But I'm not in the mindset of restricting and taking away from the true meaning of what the hunt is truly about to get to where you want to be. I like having choices on how I want to utilize the resources Mother Nature has provided for us. If I want to shoot the first buck I see, that should be my right to do so.

I think a lot of this QDM push has some good points and biologically makes some sense. However, I'm just not in the game exclusively for the bone. The bone is quite a bit down the list in my order of what makes a successful, fun hunt. It's too bad it's so high on others list and creates the tension and division between the hunting community we see here on this board all too often.

I've been down this endless road here too many times, and I am not going to get sucked in any farther in a QDM pi$$ing match.

Peace out!

[InTheNorthwoods]

Here's something I haven't seen discussed. If we’re going to look at other state’s P&Y/B&C numbers as proof they have more selective hunters and better hunting traditions let’s also be clear that many of these states are full of private hunting preserves where you're all but guaranteed one of these deer for the low low price of $4-6K+. Below are direct quote I've found from some of these private preserves in various states such as Missouri, Iowa, Illinois and even WI that come right out and say nearly ever deer shot there goes into the books.

I would expect these states to have higher numbers of P&Y/B&C with all these private reserves dedicated to putting hunters within arms reach of a monster buck.

Animals taken on a preserve are not eligible and do not count towards P&Y and B&C records.

As to the guided hunts that advertise high opportunity rates at quality P&Y and B&C animals are a sign of two things: (2) Management practices limiting the harvest of young animals works, and (2) they are often full of you know what and inflate their numbers.

[InTheNorthwoods]

Look, I know I'll never change your mind, and you'll never change mine. Deer hunting just means different things for us. Sure, I'd love to shoot a big buck, and I know I will someday, I'm sure it'll happen sooner then later as I mature as a hunter. But I'm not in the mindset of restricting and taking away from the true meaning of what the hunt is truly about to get to where you want to be. I like having choices on how I want to utilize the resources Mother Nature has provided for us. If I want to shoot the first buck I see, that should be my right to do so.

I think a lot of this QDM push has some good points and biologically makes some sense. However, I'm just not in the game exclusively for the bone. The bone is quite a bit down the list in my order of what makes a successful, fun hunt. It's too bad it's so high on others list and creates the tension and division between the hunting community we see here on this board all too often.

I've been down this endless road here too many times, and I am not going to get sucked in any farther in a QDM pi$$ing match.

Peace out!

Fair enough Brule. Don't blame you one bit, as I said earlier, there is no harm in disagreeing on these things. I hope you get your opportunity at a MN bruiser this season.

[Getanet]

Animals taken on a preserve are not eligible and do not count towards P&Y and B&C records.

As to the guided hunts that advertise high opportunity rates at quality P&Y and B&C animals are a sign of two things: (2) Management practices limiting the harvest of young animals works, and (2) they are often full of you know what and inflate their numbers.

Are you sure about statement #1? I don't know much about it, but all I've been able to find are the rules of Fair Chase prohibiting fenced in animals. None of the game reserves I quoted are fenced in. A Google search also has this from the MN DNR site, although the page is down "Though deer shot in fenced game farms don't qualify as Boone and Crockett records, bucks hunted in unfenced preserves do, if taken according to the club's ..."

As for point #2. Yes, they prove that if you have thousands of acres of private land, manipulate the land so there are optimal food sources, and then micro-manage it by limiting the number and size of animals harvested you will wind of up with bigger bucks.

[LightningBG]

As for point #2. Yes, they prove that if you have thousands of acres of private land, manipulate the land so there are optimal food sources, and then micro-manage it by limiting the number and size of animals harvested you will wind of up with bigger bucks.

I would totally agree with that.

If I a 5 mile x 5 mile block of land (yes i know that's a bunch, but not unheard of in rural areas), where I could plant food sources, water, bedding areas, minerals, and privacy. Cull the animals that aren't top notch. I have a feeling I could start pulling B&C and P&Y bucks off of it every year within a few year, greatly affecting overall numbers.

[lakevet]

" the gift of the tag" Do you remember why crosstagging was legal?? Do you really? It was because not everyone got a coveted doe tag. Are there people out there that can't get their own buck tag? Are we in a lottery area for buck tags?

Dad, "Here son, take my buck tag, you shot a nice one, you can have it"

Son, " Thanks dad, but I can use mine."

I don't understand the need to give someone a tag when they have their own. As for being done hunting when you limit is full, that happens to me more often than not. I still get a lot of enjoyment from checking in with my family and friends who aren't done. It truly is not the worst thing in the world to be done. In most cases, you don't have to be done if you don't want to. There have been many years that I just sit on a doe tag so I can still be in the woods with everyone else, even though I had opportunities to fill out. You don't have to shoot the first, or every deer that walks by.

During the doe lottery area, crosstagging was often needed just to put venison on the table, this is not so in the areas that this is taking place. Not everyone was able to shoot a doe.

Lakevet, I value your opinion, you are very passionate about it. Nothing has changed yet for you. I don't know if it will. Lets just see how zone 3 pans out. Might be successful, might not. I like that we are trying.

This post points out a fundamental problem with these discussions. Accurate information. Cross tagging has been legal in Minnesota for a long time. My 91 year old uncle has legally cross tagged deer in Minnesota his whole life. So has my 79 year old Dad. Cross tagging did not originate with doe permits, it preceded it by decades. Doe permits introduced in the 1970's did fundamentally shift hunters mindsets from being deer hunters to "gotta get a buck, any buck" hunters. This persists mindset persists today. Cross tagging was not introduced due to the doe permits system being started. It existed long before that. Even those in the DNR often are younger and when asked don't have a grasp of the reasons rules were originally in place. An example is how the muzzleloading season started. The DNR fought it until they were convinced by a small group of muzzy hunters that muzzy hunters would not result in over harvest of deer. Over harvest of deer by muzzy hunters was the big fear the DNR had about the season. Muzzy hunters would give up hunting regular firearms to limit the number of hunters in Muzzy season. This worked extremely well for years to limit hunter numbers because most wouldn't give up the regular hunt. Harvest was minimal by muzzy hunters. Then you get a change in DNR, loose the memory of why things are the way they are. Present DNR management didn't grasp this and rushed headlong into letting all hunters hunt both regular firearms and muzzy season contributing to an over harvest of deer in the SW and increased restrictions for muzzy hunters. The very thing their predecessors at the DNR warned about!!! If they had a grasp of the original intent and structuring of muzzy season (choose muzzy or regular firearms ,not both, so pressure on deer is manageble), muzzy season would not have contributed to over harvest of deer in the SW MN would not have happened. If you don't deal in facts you can't build a credible argument and end up creating more problems.

Thanks for a civil discussion!

lakevet

[lakevet]

Like Trigger had mentioned earlier, cross-tagging was started because of very few doe tags and a very low deer population. It allowed people, many who depended on venison to have a better chance to bring some meat home. With MN deer population around a million deer according to the DNR its hardly needed any more.

I really see party hunting it as a way for someone to shoot multiple bucks for themselves or their group and take hunting opportunities away from other hunters or even hunters in their own group. You guys can glorify party hunting all you want but I don't see one guy shooting multiple bucks as part of our hunting heritage. A lot of us QDM guys get labeled as greedy hunters but honestly who sounds like the more greedy hunter, the guy who tagged 2 bucks in the past 10 years or the guy who won't share his best stand and shot between 10-20 bucks in that same time span?

Again incorrect info as to when crosstagging started. see above post.

The gift of the tag is given not taken. Please don't lump all party hunters in with the guy who won't share his hot stand and grabs others tags, just as you don't want QDM guys to all be lumped with the guy who chews out his young son for shoot a buck that didn't make book.

lakevet

[lakevet]

No, but it helps. As does great habitat that is not hevily pressured because it's locked up from public access.

If you want to take this and turn it into yet another QDM horse beat-down, go ahead. Not me!

The point of this post was to show how pointless it is to go the route of banning cross tagging to get to the QDM utopia. You guys constantly throw things out about how great all the other states are and then go on to basically say they are of superior intellegence then MN hunters..... In the end, what is the one common thread from the other states that differs from MN? Post-Rut hunting season!

In the end that's what your focus should be exclusively set on. Get the hunt out of the rut and leave the rest alone. Our terrible, sinful, satanic "meat-hunting" hunting parties can continue to help fill each others tags so we can get our flesh, and the God-like Bone collectors can have more bone to go around so they no longer have to put in the amount of time to actually hunt one down!

It's a compromise this evil meat hunter is willing to make!

It's a win-win deal...I vote yes. Return the hunt to after the peak of the rut where it used to be in Minnesota and is now in Wisc and Iowa. The DNR will say its not completely post rut, so you just say past the peak of the rut. It will mean that you big buck hunters will have to hunt bucks that haven't had their brain switched to "stupid" by the lure of an in heat doe and a ton of testosterone and frustration. It worked in the past. The idea of hunters letting little bucks walk voluntarily is growing. Besides, if an area reverts to doe permits, hunters could shoot up a bunch of "saved " bucks in one season of rut hunting. Banning cross tagging would have very little effect in saving little bucks in that situation. A post peak of the rut hunt would save more bucks because more bucks wouldn't have the "stupid" switch flipped on!

lakevet

[nonteepical]

my nontypical way of thinking is that hunting post rut won't make that much of a difference. we hunt the peak of breading when the does are ready, in other words lockdown with very obvious suppressed rutting activity, the older bucks are locked on a doe and don't move untill she moves,they arent out checking scrapes and chasing like they are pre-rut and post-rut looking for another doe.the year and a halfs are moving but they haven't figured out exactly why yet. just my nontypical 2cents (worth a quarter)

[lakevet]

Iowa DNR way of thinking (not mine alone):

"The majority of the kill occurs in december after the deer breeding season when bucks are less vulnerable to being over hunted. The timing of this harvest is one of the main reasons Iowa maintains a high quality deer herd while still having the ability to take many antlerless deer."

from: A Review of Iowa's Deer Management Program page 11

www.iowadnr.gov/wildlife/files/files/draft_report.pdf

To interpret this in relating to this post:

Get the hunt off the breeding season and you can have the gift of the tag AND lots of trophy bucks

Why do some want to cause conflict between hunters with opinions not backed up by facts?

When sound evidence is presented, conflict diminishes.

It seems obvious to me but maybe the Iowa DNR and me are missing something.

lakevet

[96trigger]

Lakevet,

Are you saying that we should manage the population the way the DNR did 50 years ago? Back when the population was all but decimated in all of Minnesota. I don't believe that way of thinking worked. I think what the DNR has done to manage the heard over the last 20 years has worked well. I know that there are some areas where the tagging got too zealous and maybe should have been backed off earlier. But it won't take long for the population to rebound in those areas.

Do you disagree that gifting a tag to someone that already has one is redundant? I really would have much more satisfaction watching my 60 year old dad shoot a nice buck, than have him gift me his because I had already shot one and another dandy happened to walk in front of me. A better "Gift" would have been for me to put him in the hot stand. If anybody remembers last year, I shot a decent buck on opening morning. My cousin had not shot a deer yet. I took him to my bow hunting spots and put him in my stand that I had been seeing a nice buck out of, but had never firearm huntede out of. Low and behold he shot it, and it will be a memory that we share. I don't think it would have been nearly as memorable had I shot it and used his tag. Don't think that all of us are just out for horns. I get a lot of satisfaction of seeing anybody shoot trophy deer, myself, my dad, my cousin, uncless, whoever. Funny thing is, another decent buck had come by me that same night, I never shot it. I was not going to use his tag. Say what you want about how great a gift it is, I would have felt selfish taking his tag, even though he would have been happy to give it to me. I'm sure it worked out much better for both of us in the end.

[lakevet]

Are you saying we should not manage like Iowa and Wisconsin? Have they "decimated " their deer population by managing according to the quote and the study you can read on Iowa's Dnr website?

The point is you chose to use your tag as you feel appropriate, and I can gift mine if I so desire and the person I want to gift it to can accept or refuse it. Again, if Iowa and Wisconsin can keep both groups of hunters more satisfied, why not do it that way. I am proposing a win/win. You are saying my way only, when you can accomplish your goal without outlawing mine. Also making one change at a time ( like apr's ) would make it easier to see if it had an impact that was substantial enough to matter. Banning cross tagging is not going to make much difference. See the first post in this thread.

lakevet

p.s. back in the 50's and first half of the 60's (50 years ago) was some of the best deer hunting for numbers and big bucks our family ever had. Most of the "wallhangers" came in that time frame. I believe late 60's is when population crashed, partly hunting pressure but more so severe winters here up North.

[lakevet]

Exactly right and 100% legal...........til this Fall in zone 3

We like watching someone receiving the gift of the tag. Just like at a birthday party, everyone watches the gifts being opened, but it is about the people at the party, especially the birthday person as well as what they are getting. It is a shared experience expressing how important we are to each other.

It is part of our group dynamic. We share and take turns. We don't keep score (except if someone has a long dry spell we notice and try to up their odds If they want that done) , instead we collect alot of shared memories that we can enjoy year around with each other. Taking away the gift of the tag for us is like having everyone buy their own birthday present. You can get together and have the birthday party, but it changes the dynamic.

No I don't think it is giving someone else your tag redundant and the above quote is why.

Is it redundant for a hunter to hunt Minnesota, shoot a buck on one bank of the St Croix river then jump across to Wisconsin and shoot another buck on another tag from Wisconsin on the opposite bank? Isn't that increased pressure on deer on the border areas where deer go back in forth and have to dodge that same hunter with 2 buck tags as an individual? Why let him shoot 2 bucks? He is taking opportunity away from the hunter who can't afford to state hop. Is that fair? Just think how many more bucks we could save by having a" nationwide one buck per hunter per year" rule. just kidding

lakevet

[lakevet]

CANOPY SAM

"I have to admit though, if I were in stand with any of my kids, or if I still could hunt (with my Dad) I wouldn't hesitate to let them shoot a nice buck and tag it with my tag vs. me taking the animal. "

That is the gift of the tag.

That is my whole point.

That is what has been taken away from zone 3 hunters and probably the rest of us are targeted for similar changes.

You won't be able to let your child shoot two deer and have Dad use his tag on one. Believe me kids notice when Dad does that. Or when another member of the party gives his tag to you. Or your Dad gives his tag to another kid. I sure did, and am deeply indebted to my Dad in learning about generosity and the importance of putting people first before getting a deer.

You won't be able to let your aging parent use your buck tag because they think it is wrong for a son to give their father the gift of their tag. Instead that deer walks so it can be around next season when your parent won't be hunting anymore.

Why can't we maintain the option to do so for those of us who want to maintain our traditions?

This is also why I don't think it is redundant, it is a transfer or "gift" of something you possess that is of value and that money literally can't buy. You only get one buck tag in Minnesota no matter what you position in society or what your financial status.

lakevet

[LOTWSvirgin]

[Rippinlip]

I AGREE, I'M OUT!

[InTheNorthwoods]

Are you sure about statement #1? I don't know much about it, but all I've been able to find are the rules of Fair Chase prohibiting fenced in animals. None of the game reserves I quoted are fenced in. A Google search also has this from the MN DNR site, although the page is down "Though deer shot in fenced game farms don't qualify as Boone and Crockett records, bucks hunted in unfenced preserves do, if taken according to the club's ..."

As for point #2. Yes, they prove that if you have thousands of acres of private land, manipulate the land so there are optimal food sources, and then micro-manage it by limiting the number and size of animals harvested you will wind of up with bigger bucks.

I guess you need to clarify exactly what you are referring to going back to your original post re: advertised hunts. It is correct that fair chase, managed land hunted deer are eligible for P&Y and B&C - this is what I was referring to in the second part of my post. What I am referring to is when you say "preserve" that implies that it is not a fair chase hunt and that it is behind a fence on farm raised deer. Likely a couple of the operations that you cited in that first post are game "preserves". This would be the "hunts" where the people are advertising that they can sell you a B&C deer (for example, a 170" deer for $5000, a 180" deer for $6000, and call for price and availability on animals over 200").

Finally, one last point to bring to light based on some observations in this and the other thread going similar to this one, is that just becasue bucks are allowed to get older or even if bucks are protected, very few of them will ever make it to B&C size. That is based on having good genetics and very good forage. Any of the places that advertise that they can offer a high percentage at a B&C buck is likely full of it - there simply aren't that many of them, even on the most well managed land.

[Getanet]

Thanks Northwoods. I may have been using the wrong term, perhaps Outfitters would have been the more appropriate term. I found them all on this site:

http://www.worldclassoutdoors.com/macedonagamepreserve.htm

Interestingly, there aren't listed for MN. Maybe the ones in MN just aren't paying to advertise - although I don't know of any off the top of my head. Either way, the point is, these managed hunts definitely increase your changes of getting a B&C/P&Y. People are wondering why MN isn't measuring up - and this has to be one of the reasons why.

[nonteepical]

200,000 deer harvested during the rut or 200,000 deer shot after the rut isn't going to matter, 200,000 deer is still 200,000 deer. I measured at the Iowa deer classic last year and 10% of the heads brought in were boone, i think they were pretty vulnerable in a feeding pattern in december. you get that many people in the woods pushing them around any time of the year isn't going to make that much difference. with a 67% year and a half and younger bucks shot in Mn. annually dosen't sound like many big ones to me. at the minnesota deer classic this year i think we had 8 boone out of about +-350 entries.

[MOSSY]

Trigger it is not always about a "hot stand".some years some people in our party can't see a deer no matter what stand they are on and some see deer no matter where they are.I sure do not see the problem with someone shooting a deer for me.I like venison!!!!! nothing makesme happier or prouder than when my kids or spouse shoot one. I would hate to tell them your done now.time to go home and play video games ar watch tv. We would rather be in the woods enjoying ourselves.(have you ever seen the excitement of a kid after they shoot a deer,nothing better)

[Bear55]

Trigger it is not always about a "hot stand".some years some people in our party can't see a deer no matter what stand they are on and some see deer no matter where they are.I sure do not see the problem with someone shooting a deer for me.I like venison!!!!! nothing makesme happier or prouder than when my kids or spouse shoot one. I would hate to tell them your done now.time to go home and play video games ar watch tv. We would rather be in the woods enjoying ourselves.(have you ever seen the excitement of a kid after they shoot a deer,nothing better)

That is all good and everything Mossy and I can understand you wanting your wife and kids to be able to shoot multiple deer a year but also remember every time someone else shoots a deer they are taking away an opportunity from someone else, maybe another kid who has never shot a deer before. Sure I would be happy to see my kid shoot two deer, but I would rather see him and my nephew each get their own.

I also understand that most of the time people willingly give up their tags for others to shoot a deer for the them or the party but to me it just doesn't seem fair that a lucky hunter or hunters can shoot 2 or more deer each while the party down the road doesn't shoot anything because one party used the system to shoot as many deer as possible. Everyone here likes venison, I just don't see a reason why a person need to shoot multiple deer a year unless the population is too high.

[lakevet]

That is all good and everything Mossy and I can understand you wanting your wife and kids to be able to shoot multiple deer a year but also remember every time someone else shoots a deer they are taking away an opportunity from someone else, maybe another kid who has never shot a deer before. Sure I would be happy to see my kid shoot two deer, but I would rather see him and my nephew each get their own.

When a member of my party shoots a deer and I gift them my tag, I also gift them my opportunity to shoot a deer, not someone else's. It is not about taking it is about giving.

In hindsight I would have better served this discussion by titling the post:

"We can have the gift of the deer tag and trophy bucks by working together"

I truly believe that.

APR's will save 70%+ of 1 1/2 yr old deer. Don't see many arguing over that reg. Obvious solid return on investment backed by studies proving saving majority of bucks

Banning cross tagging will save only 7 - 10% of 1 1/2 yr old deer, yet is causing a heated debate of my type of hunting vs your type of hunting. Why waste all that effort on something with so low return of saving so few bucks. If someone has info on cross tagging ban saving a significant majority of bucks like apr's 70%+ let me know. Everything I have read the expert gives that low number then says "but it just isn't right". I think it is a reg based in opinion more than solid return on investment, and thus causes more debate. I think that is why it is only briefly mentioned when the new regs are discussed, and very little if any facts are given regarding how many bucks it will save.

lakevet

[MOSSY]

Bear

do you party hunt now or hunt by yourself?

personally I think most of the people against party hunting are the ones that hunt by themselves. I do both and find it way more enjoyable party hunting

[nonteepical]

i still don't get why people think they are taking away party hunting.