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

[InTheNorthwoods]

My tune has changed on the whole idea of changing MN hunting regs: I am still on the fence about APR's, I used to be against them, I am on the fence now. I see both sides of the argument and it is what keeps getting rehashed here every couple of months.

We don't know what the age structure of the herd is because the state doesn't track that and I am not sure if they can even track it. MN has over a half a million people out deer hunting, I am not even sure if Iowa has 100K deer hunters. When stats like 80% are thrown out there, I question where the numbers come from.

If you want to protect the bucks, move the season out of the rut.

Some of you are arguing points and splitting hairs, APR is not gonna change at this point, I don't see it expanding and truthfully, I haven't hunted in MN for a few years now, but I used to hunt in 346 and 349, and from the pictures I have seen, there are some big bucks being harvested this fall and I have to believe it is part because of the APR. Not sure how this makes the herd "healthier" though. Of course that part of the state has always had big bucks running around. Mostly because of the terrain.....

Herd health improves when you have a balanced age structure as the mature/dominant deer do a larger share of the breeding. A balanced age structure leads to a better hunting experience as you have a more competitive breeding structure as the competition brings added movement, more seeking for willing does, etc. APR's are an attempt to promote young buck survival enough to give them a chance to grow and recruit into the group of mature bucks that would be the primary breeders in a balanced herd.

For me, the best hunting I've experienced has always been in areas where there is a more balanced herd (bucks v. does), as there has been daytime rutting behavior, chasing, grunting, fighting, etc. - much of this is due to the competition for available does.

That is the theory...

The argument itself between the two sides, I believe fundamentally, boils down to whether "the kill" or "the hunt" is more important on an individual basis (understanding that both are important to almost all hunters, but what side do the scales lean). Many folks who place more weight on actually taking a deer, are less likely to want the overall experience in the field to be improved - which I'd guess is based in part on the liklihood that they've never experienced some of the events I refer to in this post. I know it wasn't until I started bowhunting that I was able to experience some of these situations because of a limited effective range of the weapon. With a gun, you simply don't have the same experience afield when the average time from seeing a deer to shooting said deer is probably less than 10 seconds for most folks.

[96trigger]

Quote:

How do you know this.

I'm sorry that I don't have data to back this up, that's all you seem to want. I guess you are part of the data driven society. The DNR will collect the data when they poll hunter satisfaction. So, why am I so confident? I live in the middle of zone 3, I have all my life, I work with the public on a daily basis. I talk deer hunting to everyone because everyone around here deer hunts. When an overwhelming majority of people talk about being in favor of APR's, or talk about how they were against it but are now all for it, you tend to get an idea that that hunter satisfaction is going to go up and that APR is going to stay.

I don't condemn anyone for being against it, I don't want to start arguments and generally, those that are against, are fundamentally against it and there will never be a compromise. However, if they are for it, I do let them know that the survey is coming out and if they get one, they better be sure to respond and let the DNR know what they think of APR.

[TruthWalleyes]

I am a data driven person. Comes from logical thinking.

The last 5 years i have hunted both firearms and muzzy season in z3. But, i apply for a lottery doe tag in a lottery zone, so i am never "Tied" to z3 for any kind of a survey. So there's 1 less vote for no apr. This year though, i applied for the lottery doe with my firearms, and didn't purchase a muzzy license until last week. I made sure to put down zone 347 so i am offered the chance to voice my opinion this year.

I think it is great that there is a survey coming out. I wish they would survey everyone in the state with a tag, and not just those that purchase their license and specify a zone in z3. I couldn't believe i've never received one of these surveys even though i've tagged dear each year in z3.

It would not be fair to make changes statewide based on the survey results in z3. That's a much differnet landscape than the flatlands i hunt in SW MN. Hopefully those groups have their chance to voice their opinion as well.

[hockeybc69]

There were hearings held in permit area 240 and 241 the same time Zone 3 was being considered.

I dont know this for a fact, but I really really doubt they would expand the APR without further widespread hearings and surveys.

[Big Dave2]

Why make everyone that enjoys larger antlers evil? Are we morally bad people cause of it? Do we not respect deer and hunting as much as others? Do we not get a say cause it's not your tradition? People make it sound like we're gonna destroy deer hunting. We have as much right to our opinions.

I don't think horn hunters are evil and I believe that you have as much right to your opinion as I do but what gives you the right to force your attitude and ways onto the rest of us? The way it was going in zone 3 seemed to work out quite nice for most people involved. If you want a large antlered animal then by all means put in the time, work and effort to hunt down a large antlered deer. Those who just want some meat for the freezer could also shoot the deer of their choice instead of passing on perfectly tasty animals just so their antlers can grow larger so folks like you can get what you want.

Seems to me like it was working just fine the way it was, I'm not sure why you feel the need to force your views on me.

[slimngrizzly]

I don't think horn hunters are evil and I believe that you have as much right to your opinion as I do but what gives you the right to force your attitude and ways onto the rest of us? The way it was going in zone 3 seemed to work out quite nice for most people involved. If you want a large antlered animal then by all means put in the time, work and effort to hunt down a large antlered deer. Those who just want some meat for the freezer could also shoot the deer of their choice instead of passing on perfectly tasty animals just so their antlers can grow larger so folks like you can get what you want.

Seems to me like it was working just fine the way it was, I'm not sure why you feel the need to force your views on me.

I guess this is where it gets me.... because im a "horn hunter", I can pass baby buck after baby buck... and it DOESN'T affect your hunt. But when you are on the other side of the fence killing every one of them because you are the "meat hunter" who is legaly party hunting... now YOU ARE affecting my hunt and ultimately the likelyhood of my future success. Now I can say im the victim!

What im saying is... currently, I CAN NOT prevent you from legally shooting all the little deer you want. However, YOU CAN prevent me from seeing mature deer because of your actions. So currently, the "horn hunters" are forced to be satisfied with the "meat hunters leftovers", so to speak. So your views are being forced on me!

i think there are more ways than just APR's to balance this... but APR's is one way!

[tfran123]

Very delicate subject, quite frankly I support APR (not for seniors or those under 18 however) and think it should be implemented statewide.

Hunters go through a maturity process over time, and after taking a number of deer one tends to want to raise the bar, same in most sports, fishing included. How many forkers does one need to put down before they yern for something a bit bigger. This isn't the pioneer days and most of us will make it through the year without venison if we fail to take a deer.

I also hate the timing of the MN gun season, peak rut. Want to know why Iowa and WI to a lesser extent harvest more mature deer? They aren't pounding as many 1.5 year olds when the ruts at the peak and those little guys are out cruising.

Why do guys go to Canada to shoot deer? It's not to take small ones. Same reason I would book a trip to Ontario to fish Northerns, I want larger fish.

[tfran123]

My final point . . .

Hunting to me is a family thing, it's more than just the kill, no doubt about that. But at the end of the day what makes the thrill of the hunt so much more exciting is when someone starts out talking about a big 10 pointer they shot, etc. Rarely are those most sacred stories about the big spike buck one shot. Not to belittle those who take small bucks, believe me I've been there. But harvesting that big buck or catching that 50" muskie, etc. is what really gets the blood going. And when the general public keeps stacking up 1.5 year olds the odds are not in your favor long term . . .

Just one persons perspective, nothing more.

[B. Amish]

someone needs to explain why a balanced age structure means a healthier deer herd. i'd buy that a balanced sex ratio can make a herd healthier. but, let's see something about this famed balanced age structure.

[Big Dave2]

I guess this is where it gets me.... because im a "horn hunter", I can pass baby buck after baby buck... and it DOESN'T affect your hunt. But when you are on the other side of the fence killing every one of them because you are the "meat hunter" who is legaly party hunting... now YOU ARE affecting my hunt and ultimately the likelyhood of my future success. Now I can say im the victim!

What im saying is... currently, I CAN NOT prevent you from legally shooting all the little deer you want. However, YOU CAN prevent me from seeing mature deer because of your actions. So currently, the "horn hunters" are forced to be satisfied with the "meat hunters leftovers", so to speak. So your views are being forced on me!

i think there are more ways than just APR's to balance this... but APR's is one way!

I disagree. There are plenty of these larger bucks around, you just have to go out and find them. They are not lurking behind every tree.

[96trigger]

I have never received a zone 3 deer survey either. If I get one this year, I will most definitely fill it out. What I did do, was attend the informational meetings the DNR put on and a round table discussion where everyone's opinions were voiced. It was pretty evenly split 50:50, which resulted in the decision to give it a 3 year trial. I have not heard anyone that was for it 3 years ago, switch their opinion and become against it. I have heard numerous people that were against it 3 years ago, change there opinion and are now for it. That is why I think it will stay in zone 3. That is why I think it will spread to areas in that state that have a healthy population (note: I said healthy population, managed and intensive areas only). I'm not talking about the 10 people I hunt with, I'm talking about 100's of people that I know and talk to frequently through email, facebook, and different organizations etc... that are now very in favor of APR. Its not hard data, its soft data, I don't need hard numbers to tell me that more people are in favor of APR than there was 4 years ago. I am very familiar with statistics, I know data can be skewed to read however I want it to read.

[tfran123]

The stronger do the breeding, that's the way it works in a balanced herd - overall that is better. Now any 1.5 year old could be superior genetically but you don't know that till years down the road . . it's a dump shoot.

It's not the buck age structure that I get hung up on it's the buck to doe ratio. On many public lands with no APR it's like 6:1 does to bucks, that makes for pretty difficult hunting. Get it closer to 1:1 and you'll see more bucks as they need to go more than 100 yards to find another doe to chase. That's a fact.

[tfran123]

quote]

I disagree. There are plenty of these larger bucks around, you just have to go out and find them. They are not lurking behind every tree.

[slimngrizzly]

Also with a balanced buck:doe ratio there will be fewer does and fawns bred late. Therefore their fawns will be born on time and go into their first winter more fully developed. A healthy herd is a live one!

[B. Amish]

The stronger do the breeding, that's the way it works in a balanced herd - overall that is better.

why is that better?

[Musky Buck]

Bingo slim. Bingo tfran. Some just like in school don't like to be told what they can or can't do even if it's fair across the board. Tired of grown men that pile up yearling bucks and buck fawns do to being a game hog of sorts, if you completely hunt within the law disregard that. If you are a tag finder or heck we butcher our own just throw it in the pile then that's for you. Let some kid maybe have the first deer hunting thrill of their lifetime.

[slimngrizzly]

I disagree. There are plenty of these larger bucks around, you just have to go out and find them. They are not lurking behind every tree.

Really? Like how many is plenty?

Why cant they be behind every tree? Part of what I used to love about duck hunting was sitting in AWWW watching thousands of ducks working the sky. I didnt need to kill them. I just enjoyed their presence! Id LOVE to witness a handful of 3 1/2 year old bucks and older standing together. I cant speak for where you are, but in my part of MN its not happening. Were lucky for (1) 3 1/2 year old buck ( or older) to exsist per 3 or 4 square miles.... thats not "plenty" in my book.

"Putting in effort" and "hunting hard" wont get you something that isn't there. Ive learned putting effort into helping young deer survive is equally or more beneficial, and rewarding, than exausting yourself trying to kill the big ones sometimes.

[fr0sty]

Does get bred during their first estrus cycle. That causes most fawns to be born at the proper time and all at once. When all fawns drop around the same time, predators kill less. They are also born earlier in the spring and have a longer time to grow before winter.

When does are not bred at the same time because of a lack of males, they keep cycling. That is stressful for the existing bucks, since they have to keep up the higher activity level of searching for and breeding does instead of eating and building back up their fat reserves. It can cause a higher mortality for those bucks.

why is that better?

[slimngrizzly]

Well.... Dave, Trigger, tfran, Musky, truth, surewood, Amish, whomever else.... handshake, handshake, handshake, handshake, handshake...

Its beer-thirty for this guy! Ill be back to mingle tomorrow. Be nice!

[Getanet]

Does get bred during their first estrus cycle. That causes most fawns to be born at the proper time and all at once. When all fawns drop around the same time, predators kill less. They are also born earlier in the spring and have a longer time to grow before winter.

When does are not bred at the same time because of a lack of males, they keep cycling. That is stressful for the existing bucks, since they have to keep up the higher activity level of searching for and breeding does instead of eating and building back up their fat reserves. It can cause a higher mortality for those bucks.

Ok, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the age of the buck. I don't think too many folks for or against APRs are saying there are too few bucks.

[Big Dave2]

Hunters go through a maturity process over time, and after taking a number of deer one tends to want to raise the bar, same in most sports, fishing included. How many forkers does one need to put down before they yern for something a bit bigger. This isn't the pioneer days and most of us will make it through the year without venison if we fail to take a deer.

Why is bigger better? When I go fishing I throw back the largest ones and keep as many of the eater size as I need for a meal for my family.

I grow tomato and pepper plants each year for eating, I have no desire for larger tomatoes and peppers.

I don't necessarily understand this desire for progression but if there needs to be progression why can't we realize that not everyone is at the same point in the progression? Just because YOU have experienced this progression does not mean that I will ever experience it or that I will experience it at the same time as you. You assume every kid starts hunting and takes many deer before they are 18. How about those who do not start until later in life?

[nonteepical]

Do we not respect deer and hunting as much as others?

We respect it more, thats the whole truth of it.

[Getanet]

I'm sure you think you do.

[Big Dave2]

Read enough and you'll see APR's are really catching on, why? People like seeing bigger deer and that's what it's about for many folks.

Food Stamps are really catching on too, so is meth and baggy pants. Doesn't make any of it right.

[tfran123]

I don't know you so it's tough for me to speculate on how you are wired. Hard to paint these things with a broad brush so not everything is as simple as we'd like it to be. But to me here are the keys . . .

-It's very unhealthy to take 70% plus of the 1.5 year old bucks annually, doesn't do much for our herd overall.

-Most people (not all) enjoy the possible thrill of taking a trophy, that's hard w/o APR's on many tracts.

-I don't have a large antler desire as much as I have a mature animal desire. Harvest one of those (and my last one was a modest racked 8 pt that dressed at 220#) - it's not always the horns.

-When you get a doe permit perhaps get your venison then, why would one need to continually stack up little bucks.

-I'm happy that you like small vegtables, little to do with this subject however.

[Big Dave2]

Really? Like how many is plenty?

Why cant they be behind every tree? Part of what I used to love about duck hunting was sitting in AWWW watching thousands of ducks working the sky. I didnt need to kill them. I just enjoyed their presence! Id LOVE to witness a handful of 3 1/2 year old bucks and older standing together. I cant speak for where you are, but in my part of MN its not happening. Were lucky for (1) 3 1/2 year old buck ( or older) to exsist per 3 or 4 square miles.... thats not "plenty" in my book.

"Putting in effort" and "hunting hard" wont get you something that isn't there. Ive learned putting effort into helping young deer survive is equally or more beneficial, and rewarding, than exausting yourself trying to kill the big ones sometimes.

So in order for you to consider there are "plenty" of large antlered deer around there would have to be enough for EVERYONE who hunts to be able to shoot one every year?

[Big Dave2]

I don't know you so it's tough for me to speculate on how you are wired. Hard to paint these things with a broad brush so not everything is as simple as we'd like it to be. But to me here are the keys . . .

-It's very unhealthy to take 70% plus of the 1.5 year old bucks annually, doesn't do much for our herd overall.

I have been arguing this subject every year for several years and I have yet to see any proof of this statement.

-Most people (not all) enjoy the possible thrill of taking a trophy, that's hard w/o APR's on many tracts.

Anything worth doing is hard. What thrill will it be when ALL of the deer are "trophies"?

-I don't have a large antler desire as much as I have a mature animal desire. Harvest one of those (and my last one was a modest racked 8 pt that dressed at 220#) - it's not always the horns.

So when you buy a steak at the grocery store do you ask the butcher for the t-bone that came out of the oldest cow?

-When you get a doe permit perhaps get your venison then, why would one need to continually stack up little bucks.

If I don't get a doe permit or see a doe, then what? Not that long ago there was no such thing as a doe permit in my area.

-I'm happy that you like small vegtables, little to do with this subject however.

[countyline]

So if you had a deer population and the ratio was say, 2-1. How ever the buck sample in the herd was mainly comprised of 1.5 year old's. Would that make the herd weaker because smaller deer were breeding. The ratio is lower so the breeding would be done fast and furious, just by small bucks. I'm sure they would fight each other to. You would think deer would be like people. Younger ones have healthier babies. Allowing any doe over 3.5 to have a fawn might not be the best for the herd.

With the dates of the MN gun deer season. Most deer breed in zone three would be breed by smaller deer anyway. Since the average breed date in MN is the 12th of Nov. All the bigger ones would be shot off. Now in the rest of the state the does would be breed by bigger bucks since all the smaller deer get shot. So I guess outside of zone 3 would have stronger born fawns.

[Getanet]

I don't know you so it's tough for me to speculate on how you are wired. Hard to paint these things with a broad brush so not everything is as simple as we'd like it to be. But to me here are the keys . . .

-It's very unhealthy to take 70% plus of the 1.5 year old bucks annually, doesn't do much for our herd overall.

-Most people (not all) enjoy the possible thrill of taking a trophy, that's hard w/o APR's on many tracts.

-I don't have a large antler desire as much as I have a mature animal desire. Harvest one of those (and my last one was a modest racked 8 pt that dressed at 220#) - it's not always the horns.

-When you get a doe permit perhaps get your venison then, why would one need to continually stack up little bucks.

-I'm happy that you like small vegtables, little to do with this subject however.

Tfran, you seem pretty reasonable about this, but I have to disagree with your first bullet. A) can you find any source other than a QDMA study that claims a percent of yearling buck harvest in MN? Even if you're percentage is accurate, it's not X% of all bucks as you state. It's only a percentage of the bucks that get shot - huge difference there. If deer hunters were shooting 70% of all bucks we would have a serious population problem on our hands and we'd probably have to shut hunting season down for many years to let the population recover.

[skee0025]

The stronger do the breeding, that's the way it works in a balanced herd - overall that is better. Now any 1.5 year old could be superior genetically but you don't know that till years down the road . . it's a dump shoot.

Genetics wont improve with time. An "inferior" 1.5 year old will still be "inferior" at 4.5 years. One thing that APR's does is insure that the Inferior will not be culled from the herd. I let all of the smaller deer I see pass, buck or doe, it doesnt matter. Age doesnt ensure a bucks rack will reach 4 points a side. I've taken several large Bucks that only had 6 points. The first thing that should have been tried was to move the hunt out of the rut IMO. That seems to work well in surrounding states. I'm lucky enough to hunt in Wisconsin where it seems everyone is out for the big buck and passes on shooting the Does. Their loss, a mature deer is a mature deer, more opportunities for me.