APR 2013?

[PurpleFloyd]

APR and doe harvest have nothing to do with each other. Doe harvest is for population control and buck doe ratio. APR will work in any terrain in the world as long as a whitetail(or any other antlered game)calls it home. APR's only function is to let the majority of yearlings reach their second birthday and has nothing to do with does.

If nobody shoots does or young bucks, just what pray tell will they be shooting? How many of what is left do you think there is to go around? If you believe people are purposely letting big deer walk just so they can harvest a yearling I would disagree. You are not going to get tht population high enough to "Satisfy" every hunter unless you increase the whole population exponentially.

[SmellEsox]

nonteepical, if you restrict buck harvest, you shift more harvest to antlerless deer. Whether it is intended or not, APR shifts harvest to antlerless deer. And I would argue that if deer populations are low, and if you still allow either sex hunting, you will decrease the population more, and you may decrease the number of bucks in the area due to higher buck fawn harvest.

Usually when agencies institute APR, one of their goals is to increase antlerless harvest.

[Getanet]

APR and doe harvest have nothing to do with each other.

One of the stated goals of APR, from everyone from the DNR to many groups supporting APR, is to put more pressure on antlerless deer.

[mntatonka]

APR and doe harvest have nothing to do with each other. Doe harvest is for population control and buck doe ratio. APR will work in any terrain in the world as long as a whitetail(or any other antlered game)calls it home. APR's only function is to let the majority of yearlings reach their second birthday and has nothing to do with does.

wait just a minute. The main goal of APR was to increase the doe harvest. That was number one, and was pushed over and over again by the DNR and the APR supporters. Now you're telling me that APR's have nothing to do with doe harvest? Which is it?

/sarcasm

On a more serious note, you're actually pretty close to correct. APR's haven't increased the doe harvest, which would explain why we're doing an early antlerless season again in places. Hard winters killed a lot of deer, but hunters didn't kill any more than they did before APR's were put in place.

[SmellEsox]

mntatonka, maybe that is an indication that the deer herd isn't as high as a lot of people think. I tend to think that deer numbers are often overestimated, but that is just my seat of the pants opinion.

[MUSKY18]

Well if they want to get the numbers of the herd up, they should go back to 2 seasons, instead of one 9 day season like we have now.

[TruthWalleyes]

Well if they want to get the numbers of the herd up, they should go back to 2 seasons, instead of one 9 day season like we have now.

One 9 day season? Hardly

I've got tags to hunt Archery, 3A, Muzzleloader....3 month season for me.

But, i know what you mean and i would disagree with it. Though it would limit opportunity and thus limit harvest.

[flipper]

I liked the two season hunt like it use to be as well. (Not counting archery and muzzleloading).

[PurpleFloyd]

Well if they want to get the numbers of the herd up, they should go back to 2 seasons, instead of one 9 day season like we have now.

That would certainly be one way to get hunters to shoot even more small bucks. I will say that I have seen more willingness to wait for a better deer now that you don't essentially have to shoot something in the first day of the season to have a shot at filing the tag.

Realistically, and this is going to be something both sides will find hard to adjust to but better in the end, is to focus on the areas where the population is suitable to have and APR and have it work and work towards having hunters in those few areas move towards it while in the rest of the state the goal should be habitat, habitat, habitat and once that is accomplished and the deer herd numbers are built up then they can start on those areas.

[mntatonka]

mntatonka, maybe that is an indication that the deer herd isn't as high as a lot of people think. I tend to think that deer numbers are often overestimated, but that is just my seat of the pants opinion.

Ok, so why are we (Zone 3) doing a regulation that is supposed to increase the doe harvest (even though it didn't)? And why are we having an early antlerless season again? And why are farmers complaining more than ever about crop damage (other than the high price of crops of course)?

I'll agree, the deer population in Zone 3 isn't as high as it was in the early 2000's, and that's great. It's still way too high in a lot of places though, and APR's don't help that one bit.

[tfran123]

Unfortunately PA has lost deer hunters, but believe me when I tell you this is a National phenomenon, don't believe me just do some research. Recruitment of youth hunters is critical and all hunters should do what they can to introduce others (especially kids) to our fine sport. We've got an aging demographic and pit that against kids sports, other activities and computer games you've suddenly got increased competition. It's a whole different generation and we must get serious about this.

[HandGunner]

My area use to be 5 deer limit, then the next year was managed, the same year apr was added. If we improve antlerless harvest wont we be killing everything from fawns and males with nubs as well as all the doe? Just to increase rack size? Then ppl are saying its to increase population but then if we shoot so many young deer and doe how will bucks and spike breed more deer if theres so few doe around. But wait oh no so many deer dont even make it a year or 2 but aren't fawns and antlerless males not even a year old yet? At least younger than a spike to not even be a spike, dont forget doe tht are also not even a year yet. Theres so many flaws in this regulation.

Birth to 16 years old you can shoot whatever you want but after tht its mature bucks only, but once your an old fart you can shoot whatever you want again? So basically you have a moral around camp to then go back and say i can shoot whatever i want again because im an old fart?

If i wanted to hunt big racks just like tv ill pay my way to hunt on a private guided hunt were i can be told the big ones already are, farmers are also hypocrites because how is it tht ever since i started hunting 13 years ago they always had their crops harvested before firearms opened, now for the last 3 years they will keep it up until late season B starts just so we have a disadvantage when hunting season A by having the corn still up and allow deer to hideout and feast.

[SmellEsox]

1. Either hunters are behaviorally refusing to shoot does or there aren't as many deer as DNR thinks there is or deer were nocturnal last season and were more difficult to harvest (it was like that up by me last year).

2. DNR thinks there is too many deer, so they are having an early antlerless season because they have been shown to be additive to regular antlerless harvests during regular seasons.

3. APR may have helped. Maybe antlerless harvest would have been even less had there not been APR.

[TruthWalleyes]

2. DNR thinks there is too many deer, so they are having an early antlerless season because they have been shown to be additive to regular antlerless harvests during regular seasons.

What the heck are you talking about "Early Antlerless" ???

Are you talking 3A/3B?

I don't see anything about an early anterless hunt

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/deer/index.html

[SmellEsox]

mntatonka mentioned an early antlerless season so I assumed he was right. Didn't check on it myself.

[muskE]

Look, I hunt in an APR and I deal with it. Do I like it? No. Do I understand it? No. It never really made sense why we had a harvest of 5 to limit populations and help the farmers but had restrictions in place that limited what could be shot. Nobody filled all their tags and the initial DNR goal of 5 was never reached.

Since APR started I've seen a handful of dead spikes and more coyotes than I ever have. I'm not real proud of whomever is in the woods before me if they knowingly left the deer for wanton waste and I can't help but assume they were left due to fear of a slap on the wrist from the DNR. I understand that there's an occasional lost deer (it happens) but not all the same sex and rough age class! I also think those same deer would have been tagged and processed pre-APR. So what's better?

I think APR has it's place but the DNR has done a poor job in communication, education, and (subsequently) buy-in from the general hunting public and it's ripped an increasing chasm of angst between our fellow hunters who are either pro or anti-APR and in extreme cases it has even tested people's ethics. I'm not saying we need to all drink the APR Kool-Aid but I would like to see some lectures, webinars, or whatever from the DNR that shows they are making a concerted effort to re-connect with the public.

Funding? We're a fishing state and most of the cash goes there but I would like to see a $1 surcharge to all licenses (including fishing) that goes directly to educating the public on such issues. I'm sure I'll get shredded for suggesting this but it's green-light thinking with a possible solution rather than the typical rant with no resolution seen in earlier posts.

I'm not chastising anyone here any more than I would for someone with a limit +1 of walleye. I can't control how people act but I know I hold true to my values and try to pass that on to my family and peers.

[mntatonka]

What the heck are you talking about "Early Antlerless" ???

Are you talking 3A/3B?

I don't see anything about an early anterless hunt

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/deer/index.html

check again. There's an early antlerless season in two spots, in 346/349, and in 344. Makes sense to have an early antlerless season in parts of an area that's a hunter's choice area, right? The DNR says "we're going to limit everyone in 344 to one deer, except for this chunk of land where you can take 3 (or 4 with the free landowner tag)".

Meanwhile, in 346/349 we can take two, except half of our hunting land we can take 4 on. Then there's the small matter of getting a bunch of tags for crop damage as well. Yup, our wonderful DNR definitely has a handle on how many deer there really are...

[Jameson]

You can take 5 (five) antlerless during this years early-antlerless season. Not the 2 (two) in mntatonka's figures. Everyone should look at the printed deer area map that is available at the stores with the regs. The maps shows a how a couple of small sub-areas have been designated open to the EA season. I am way shocked that the DNR did it this way, but think it will work out well. Not sure if this could ever be expanded as it would just get too complicated.

[CANOPY SAM]

farmers are also hypocrites because how is it tht ever since i started hunting 13 years ago they always had their crops harvested before firearms opened, now for the last 3 years they will keep it up until late season B starts just so we have a disadvantage when hunting season A by having the corn still up and allow deer to hideout and feast.

Seriously? HandGunner, do you really think all the farmers in the country are altering the time they typically harvest their crops in a mass conspiracy to "hide" the deer for themselves?

So after briefly reviewing a few pages of this thread, is it safe to assume that APR's aren't working?

[mntatonka]

You can take 5 (five) antlerless during this years early-antlerless season. Not the 2 (two) in mntatonka's figures. Everyone should look at the printed deer area map that is available at the stores with the regs. The maps shows a how a couple of small sub-areas have been designated open to the EA season. I am way shocked that the DNR did it this way, but think it will work out well. Not sure if this could ever be expanded as it would just get too complicated.

whoops, you're right. I had read that in the rules but completely forgot we could take 5 during that season. That makes my point even more. One side of our land we can take 7 total, but the other side we can only take 2. I realize they had to draw a border somewhere, but this is just stupid.

[96trigger]

Just an FYI. Early antlerless in the 300 zone is a very small area of 345 and 346 only. Not 344 or 349.

[mntatonka]

Just an FYI. Early antlerless in the 300 zone is a very small area of 345 and 346 only. Not 344 or 349.

Wow, I'm really out of it today. You're correct. I think I may need new glasses before hunting season at this rate lol

[benbosh]

Seriously? HandGunner, do you really think all the farmers in the country are altering the time they typically harvest their crops in a mass conspiracy to "hide" the deer for themselves?

So after briefly reviewing a few pages of this thread, is it safe to assume that APR's aren't working?

Exactly what I thought Sam..

Hmm.. I make a living off this stuff, I better leave it in for deer season so they don't shoot all of my deer. I'll just leave it in and pick it when its way too dry and my test weight isn't very good. A few docked points on the grade of my corn won't affect my paycheck at all. (Thats all sarcasm)

[CANOPY SAM]

Yep Ben, it's way more economical to harvest a couple deer for the 100 lbs of venison vs. harvesting the corn, beans, wheat, etc., at a time when you'll realize $25-50K more per section. I mean honestly, that venison is priceless compared to corn fed Angus beef (again, just a little sarcasm...if you couldn't read between the lines....or thru the unharvested fields).

[HandGunner]

well they do harvest their corn its the fact that they harvest all the corn except plots near the public hunting land you will see a field of harvested corn then a line of unharvested corn along the edge of the woods, they also will wait until we hunt and harvest it right as ppl are hunting in their stands luckily Im not by the corn fields

[PurpleFloyd]

There are enough reasons why APR is not a good statewide policy that we don't need to post stuff like that as a reason. Farmers income depends on getting the crop out when it is ready and as efficiently as possible. If you are seeding them leave crop it is either as a windbreak, winter forage or maybe they decided to leave it so it holds deer so they can hunt it themselves.

The only way I can see them leaving crop in the field other than that would be for spite because some particular hunter did something to tick them off so bad that they are willing to lose money and time just to spite a particular group. Obviously there is an exception to every rule but no way is that a common practice.

[TruthWalleyes]

My dad will leave a little strip of corn for winter feed as well as hunting purposes. He is a farmer, he is a meat hunter, and he tries to get his hunting done the first morning so he can get back to farming. He will not hunt if the crops are fit, if we get wet, you might see him sitting on opener, otherwise income comes first.

[CANOPY SAM]

I see what you're saying HG, but I think the previous two posts spell it out pretty clearly.

I've also seen large areas, or regions of the state, where farmers will intentionally leave 10% of their crop remaining in the field after harvest. This is commonly known as a tithe (an offering to the Lord), in some circles of faith, and you'd be surprised to know how often this is done. It's basically the same as putting 10% of your income in the offering plate at church on Sunday.

If a farmer were to leave a portion of his crop standing simply to impede other nearby public land hunters, he'd be tossing a LOT of money into the wind these days. Yes, many will leave a short strip of standing crop as a food plot, a little winter feed for the critters, or even for a chance to draw an animal out for their own freezer, but hey, it's their land, it's their money, and it's their prerogative. It's really not appropriate to blame them for that, and it's just simply inaccurate to accuse ALL farmers of plotting to hamstring all hunting.

With the profit margins in farming as high as they are these days, every farmer out there will scramble to bring in his crops at the precise time that it's ready to harvest, and bring to market.

Unfortunately, this year you will likely see many, many tall standing row crops (corn, soybeans, sunflowers, etc.) still standing very late into the fall. This isn't by design. It's due to a very late spring, and subsequently a very late planting season, and a much cooler than average summer, which results in a very late harvest. If I know these guys very well, and I do know many very well, they want to get those crops off as soon as possible, so they can secure the financial future of their farms, and move on to other things.

They won't intentionally leave the crop in the field any longer then necessary and chance losing it altogether. That would be extremely foolish.

Okay, so now that I've stepped up to bat for farmers everywhere, I believe it's entirely appropriate that you all grant me permission to hunt your land this fall!

[PurpleFloyd]

If I know these guys very well, and I do know many very well, they want to get those crops off as soon as possible, so they can secure the financial future of their farms, and move on to other things.

Like Arizona. Florida or Texas for the winter. You can't mess around when you have places to go.

[BLACKJACK]

Like Arizona. Florida or Texas for the winter. You can't mess around when you have places to go.

There are all kind of farmers just like there are all kinds of hunters. Some will cuss because the critters are eating too much of their crops in certain areas by the woods and swamps - can't blame them with the high prices - but then they won't let hunters in to hunt, they save it for their relatives. Can't blame them on that either - but then don't cuss.

Some farmers DO like to see the critters and will leave a few rows of corn to feed them thru the winter but again, with the high prices, you see less and less of that.

Now lets get back to $#@$%#@ about APR's!!!