APR's good for hunter recruitment but not for retention?

[Bear55]

I wouldn't mind seeing a little APR on a rotating basis, maybe every other year in some areas or every 3rd or 5th year in others when the population can support it. Over time I think it could be an effective education tool. It would also be fun to watch the riple effect on one class of bucks in areas that might never see it otherwise.

[InTheNorthwoods]

I don't think we want to be establishing different regulations for hunting private and public land, especially as private land hunters already have many advantages over public land hunters.

Just throwing out ideas...

It isn't really a different regulation per se, it is the landowner (here, a government entity) that is controlling how its land is used for hunting. Private landowners are instituting such "regulations" all the time (who comes in, what can be shot, etc.). I just see it as a way of making public land hunting a little better for everyone.

I am in favor of changes with our deer hunting regulations statewide, but I am not really an APR fan. If I was in charge there would be no APR's, but there would be other changes that APR detractors do not like (no cross tagging, lottery for all gun tags, gun tags only good for area they are drawn, possibly move the gun season back a few weeks, a lot like North Dakota employs).

[Jameson]

I too wouldn't hate having a short rotation of APR's. I do not like mandatory APR's, but if only the general hunting public here in MN could see what would happen if we passed on most 1.5 year old bucks. My arguments against APR concentrate on the degrading of the antler gene over a long period of time, and having too many spikes get accidentally killed as does and turning the hunters off of hunting due to a difficult rule to follow (for some.) A year of APR's somewhere isn't going to cause the long term effects I worry about.

I don't think we want to be establishing different regulations for hunting private and public land, especially as private land hunters already have many advantages over public land hunters.

I'm a strong supporter of a buck lottery. Why? Because that is how nearly all of the private land owners manage their land, so it must be a good thing that I'd like to see expanded. Show me a private landowner that limits the bucks taken on their property, but is against buck lottery and I'll show you a hypocrite.

[hockeybc69]

I am against a buck lottery. Not against the crew shooting 5 legimate mature bucks, given the chance. I dont personally know anyone that says, "only 3 bucks can be shot this year on our land". or whatever the number is.

Will it ever happen that we all tag out on mature bucks during one hunting season? Highly doubtful. But sure would stink to be on stand doe hunting and seeing that once in a lifetime buck and have to pass on it.... And you think people will bich about APR cuz they have to pass a forkhorn? Think of the guys having to pass a 4.5 year old deer cuz they didnt get drawn to shoot a buck.

[psepuncher]

I would be for a draw, winners to be able to hunt on specific WMA's during the rut, and also close some WMA's 2 weeks during the rut.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

So glad none of you are in charge...

[hockeybc69]

Glad the guys in charge put APR in place in SE MN to try it. Someone was using their heads.

[TruthWalleyes]

If you are fundamentally against APR, there is no amount of data or enough surveys that will satisfy you and get you to change your mind. Arguing about it will get nowhere. I've argued plenty on here, entertaining at first, but just plain old after awhile. There will be more meetings and surveys before the 2013 season. For or against APR, you will have a chance to voice your opinion and I suggest you do. I am going to, and I hope APRs stay. Most of the people I have talked to in this area hope they stay. My belief is that they will. If they do not, I will not quit hunting, neither will my party. In fact, I will not change a thing. I will still, like I have for 10 years, pass on forks and ba

skets. As will my party. The land owners we hunt with do not want to see immature bucks get shot anymore. As do most of the land owners around us. I will shoot a doe for meat. I will continue to work just as hard for those more mature bucks and does, hunting all 3 seasons if need be, eating tag after tag. If APR goes away, I think enough people have seen a benefit from it to continue the practice.

What benefit? Horns a benefit?

[nonteepical]

I applaud the the DNR, Lou Cornecelli in particular for being progressive and listening to the deer hunters and trying to give them the deer hunting they want, and taking a different approach. and up yours to the MDHA pukes who now made it a legislative decision on how our deer hunting will be done from now on and not by the expert biologists of the DNR, now some liberal old bag representing minneapolis will vote how our deer hunting will be done. Like them or hate them the DNR listening to the people should make the decisions on deer hunting not the lawmakers.

[psepuncher]

So glad none of you are in charge...

yep,

After reading ALL of the hunters dis-satisfaction and whining about how poorly managed the public WMA's are compared to the advantageous private land hunting oportunities, I'm surprised anyone still hunts WMA's.

Doing this WILL bring fair chase to highly managed public land hunting. A complete 180* that will have hunters whining how they're not able to hunt highly manged WMA's because they didn't get drawn.

If this state were to be competetive as even traditional hunting goes, there's going to have to be measures taken to ensure it thrives. I have been in a state where this has been implimented and it is the cats &$$. It drives dollars to the state and is a highly sought after opportunity for many sportsmen.

It also keeps the private lands from being highly leased as this takes the pressure off of seeking permission from land owners. The ones I have been a part of also provided well kept grounds for camping, and a check station. The deer in those places were not only populated with very nice bucks but also the experience is just like getting your own private land with a few other hunters.

{ }...Hardly.

[nonteepical]

The MDHA guys i'm talking about are the higher ups in grand rapids not the individual deer hunting enthusiest that make up the organization. just to clarify my position not meant to offend the every day member.

[Getanet]

But sure would stink to be on stand doe hunting and seeing that once in a lifetime buck and have to pass on it....

Why would it stink? Remember all those virtues about having mature bucks in the herd? I’m not for a buck lottery either, but therein lies my rub with APRs. People are fine imposing their standards on others, but as soon as their choice is taken away, now they have a problem.

Just stirring the pot. I don't have a problem with Zone 3 being APR. I don't want it to spread to the zone I hunt. I believe the hunter should be able to make their own choice, and to me many of these restrictions are like invasive species. If you wait until they’re at your doorstep, it's too late.

[surewood]

If it ever came to a vote in my area I'd be a supporter.

[Musky Buck]

The 40 or so guys I know would all support it without question and guess what I doubt any of the 40 would make a mistake taking a small buck as a doe since it hasn't ever happened in reverse where they got a doe and it turned into a buck. I do understand young/old hunters and low light I get that, but challenge yourself just once to let that small buck go, it feels better than pulling the trigger without question once you've got a few bucks under your belt. It's catch and release basically.

[flipper]

Yup it sure makes a lot of sense. If you want big antlers cull out all the big antlered deer and leave the basket racks to breed. I guess Darwin and all the modern geneticists had it all backwards.

[Musky Buck]

They are already breeding and have for many many years. Our deer hunting group would love to have you lol come speak to our group who are tired of the endless tag supply and slaughter of immature bucks in the area, you'd think with so many of us letting them walk it would've made the difference but it hasn't, it should, but it can't, bring on APR so the little bucks eventually will breed much less.

[surewood]

I hear all the time about how it's about the hunt, not pulling the trigger. As a person that targets mature deer I totally understand that. Yet, because we would like to see immature deer survive a couple years we're labeled as the "horn porn" guys. It's simple for me. I would like for people to let deer walk without regulations. That won't happen, so although it's not perfect I'd support apr. Of course still allowing youth and if it isn't legal already seniors also. I understand that others are happy with killing immature deer. I'm not. So if I'm ever in the majority I'll be for changes. It's just my opinion. With that said I'm not the kind of person to turn my nose up if someone shoots a small deer. I congratulate them.

[Z7EXTERME]

My question is every year I hear hunters say they hunt for the meat but when the season is over and they are complaining they didn't fill there tag because they passed on some smaller deer waiting for that wallhanger but they are against arp. To me if you want meat why wouldn't you shoot the first msture doe or deer you see. The way i see it if you take two or three years of arp you would increase the chance of seeing more mature bucks and if the states deer population is healthy you should be able to harvest doe. A lot of people will complain if arp is expanded untill they see what it will do for the mature bucks in the state.

[Z7EXTERME]

+1 on that

[Big Dave2]

I understand that others are happy with killing immature deer. I'm not.

So why not do what you want to do and let others do what they want to do?

[Stratosman]

Do a search on this topic and check some other forums that have discussions regarding APR in states like Missouri and PA... alot of people stating that they notice very little gain in mature or large buck sightings... now of course I take all web based information with a grain of salt, but just reading for my own information and curiousity as I am unsure myself.

The meat issue has never been an issue, I am fortunate to hunt 3-4 times a week when I want to, therefore does get harvested, and I wait for a mature buck to stroll by.

BUt I get the argument that some don't care about antlers, the hunt is for the enjoyment and of course the meat. And who am I to tell them what a trophy is? Sure I would like to shoot a big buck every year and have been fortunate to take a few lately, but it's becasue of hard work, scouting trips, multiple trail cameras, food plots and dozens of stands over two farms. I enjoy every part of the hunt including all the preseason hard work, and am grateful for the opportunity to do so.

But if I only hunted a handfull of times a year, I would shoot the first little buck I see, and probably a doe too. And would be proud of it. I have put alot of thought into this subjest and have gone back and forth several times, heck, I have probably even posted in favor of them before!!

But I think you shouldn't be able to legislate what people should be able to determine for themselves, and that is what they consider being successful..

Look at the well known big buck states: Iowa, Kansas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois ect. None have point restrictions and don't need to, why should we?

What I beleive they all have however, is thier gun season after the rut. IMO that is the biggest factor in allowing more bucks to survive a couple more years, and allows the mature bucks more opportunites and time to breed the does to further their genes before they are being killed. Heck, alot of these states allow two buck tags per year! They are doing something right.

APR, I would 60/40 vote no...

Later gun season: 100 percent yes

I just hate more and more laws, and that is alot of my problem...

[Spike76]

Stratosman, very good post.

[TruthWalleyes]

I hear all the time about how it's about the hunt, not pulling the trigger. As a person that targets mature deer I totally understand that. Yet, because we would like to see immature deer survive a couple years we're labeled as the "horn porn" guys. It's simple for me. I would like for people to let deer walk without regulations. That won't happen, so although it's not perfect I'd support apr. Of course still allowing youth and if it isn't legal already seniors also. I understand that others are happy with killing immature deer. I'm not. So if I'm ever in the majority I'll be! for changes. It's just my opinion. With that said I'm not the kind of person to turn my nose up if someone shoots a small deer. I congratulate them.

I do support quality deer management but not for forcing that harvest practice onto others for the sake of bigger antlers. it takes time to change hunting generations. I never grew up hunting horns. I also won't teach my daughter that it is all about horns. Carry on. Good luck

[PropsterII]

Spot on Stratos, but don't be pushing too hard for those new regulations. Remember a big chunk if this crew can't/won't read/understand more regulation, and they certainly don't want their tradition changed

[mntatonka]

If we're moving the A season out of the rut, then Archery season should also close from Oct 15 to Dec 1 (or the weekend before thanksgiving, if the "B" season in zone 3 is left during the same dates). That way there's no pressure at all during the rut

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

I just hate more and more laws, and that is alot of my problem...

Stratos,

So how do you deal with areas that go from Intensive to Managed to Hunters Choice to Lottery?

We have had a big swing in the state over the last couple of years.... Change is in the wind and most of us have had to deal with some sort of change.

You call it more and more laws..... Its simply a change of times in my eyes. Call it what you want.

I dont know if you fish or not, but have you looked at the MN Fishing regs in the last 5 years to see whats changed there? Incredible regulated changes from border to border.

[Spike76]

hockeybc69, the fish regs just to get larger fish is wrong too. If there are reasons to help a lake the people will except different regs. Yes the times are changing, but don't change the regs to help people get larger fish or deer. Get them on your own and you will have done something. Not everyone wants the larger ones.

[pike79]

hockeybc69, the fish regs just to get larger fish is wrong too. If there are reasons to help a lake the people will except different regs. Yes the times are changing, but don't change the regs to help people get larger fish or deer. Get them on your own and you will have done something. Not everyone wants the larger ones.

+1

[surewood]

Not everyone wants to see the slaughter of forks and spikes either. Will apr guarantee I shoot big deer? Definitely not. All I'm saying is that I don't like to see young deer piled up in trucks and on hanging poles. Enough that if I had a vote I'd support it. I'm not trying to persuade anyone to join my side. If I'm ever in the majority then that's the way it might be. Right now it's legal to shoot young bucks and I live with it. It's really just my opinion and I'd like to see bucks live more then 1.5years. If there was solid evidence that it was a bad idea I'd change my tune. So to the question why regulate what other people can shoot? Cause I don't like seeing young deer slaughtered year after year. My opinion.

To the point about other states like Iowa, Kansas etc. not having apr. I agree hunting out of the rut would help, but a big problem is our number of hunters. Not sure on the numbers, but we have many more hunters then other states. Which I'm guessing means a higher harvest. So the deer in those states have a much better chance reaching maturity due to less hunters and no modern firearms over the rut. With our number of hunters I don't think we can be measured the same way.

[TruthWalleyes]

I think some people need to get out of their lottery area and go to where the deer have a higher population density...