APR 2013?

[Bear55]

Is that me you are talking to? I haven't shot a buck mature or imature for over ten years and have been passing on a lot of does too so I guess I'm not in the brown its down camp! You guys might want to realize that just because someone understands what a pile of carp APR is that doesn't mean they are meat hogs.

No flip not targeting you just kind of posting in general and having a little fun. Not an APR fan either, plenty of us big buck hunters don't care for it. Although I probably wouldn't make a big deal about it either if an area I hunted went APR.

[Bear55]

Well if you have 500,000+ hunters in the woods, and the majority of them are willing to shoot a doe, or a spike buck, then you convert them over to 500,000+ head hunters that will only shoot large rack bucks, now the competition for large racks starts tenfold from what it is now. Then you will have trophy hunters from thoughout the country coming here, then you will have pretty much all land leased to the highest bidder. No more cheap deer hunting. Poaching will increase as well. Supply and demand. Right now we have a majority happy to shoot a doe, a forkhorn, or small basket racks, and you want to make it mandatory to shoot large racked deer.

This would be great! Kind of like Iowa but with more pressure. Lots of mature bucks running around.

Really I'm not competing with other hunters but the deer themselves. Other hunters come into play but if 500K hunters can't fill their tags shooting everything they are surely not going to shoot all the mature bucks.

[Musky Buck]

What'strange is we've been practicing go grow which is apr in sense, nothing less than an 8 and there's about 20 of us some years not all the guys show up but why haven't we had any mistakes in the 25 years we've been doing this ? In no way am I implying we're the best hunting party in the state, we have from ages 80 down to 25 or so with a few newcomers we're training in, they get solid help because they can't hunt alone until they're 15 and by then they understand. First few years you bet they can harvest what they want but generally they want to be like us older goats. They learn it's a challenge you just don't pile up a deer because it isn't a fawn. If it's too dark or whatever you just put that safety on. I can only imagine how happy the neighboring land owners are that they can load the trailer with yearling bucks year after year hence the reason you hear about go grow, APR's, let him walk, and other slogans etc. To some a yearling buck at 125 is big, to us it's not, it's a future buck that needs to survive a winter or 3. Where we hunt deer in Ottertail county it would be absolutely boring to go out and hammer a yearling buck at first light opening day year after year, we all tend to see some of them likely because we aren't piling up fawns either the year before they get a rack. Some go away happy each year some longing for the next year, now with the deerless ones muzzleloading there's some sort of a chance to still connect, either way we get to enjoy a lot of days in the field or stand. Many of us could use venison as we're not driving escalades into deercamp, not at all. Our group enjoys the challenge and the 0 guarantee, people say a buck behind every tree there already is, just 75% of them are yearlings. I think if I didn't like apr I'd definitely want to bow,gunand muzzy it to increase my chances.

[PurpleFloyd]

Kinda goes both ways to doesnt it? Just imagine how hard it would be to find a big buck, if 500,000 hunters in the woods are all looking for trophy bucks. Not only that, but how hard it owuld be to get land to hunt the prime big buck areas.

Sorta like fishing. Check out the number of boats at a particular lake when the bite is slow and then start telling the guys at the bar, bait shop and on the forums that the big walleyes are biting and see how the fishing pressure increases. Any time there are big deer around the same thing happens. Word gets out and suddenly there is a convoy of trucks circling the section.

[Wanderer]

No flip not targeting you just kind of posting in general and having a little fun. Not an APR fan either, plenty of us big buck hunters don't care for it. Although I probably wouldn't make a big deal about it either if an area I hunted went APR.

I'm really in the same camp about APR even though I've been posting on the APR side (really posting against some of the anti-APR comments more than anything).

When APR was first announced for SE MN, I had mixed feelings. Yes, I wanted to see the bucks get chance to mature instead of having to run the gauntlet every year and hardly ever see mid sized 8 pointers like I've been seeing lately but I also knew the money would likely follow. The money reason was the only reason I've said, "If we're going to have APR, make it statewide" to spread out the competition. APR doesn't have to mean 4 or more points on a side EVERYWHERE. It could be 3, or whatever was appropriate for each area.

If they repealed APR in this state completely, I'd still sleep just fine but I'd also know that it would crash the male population of the already reduced deer heard where I currently hunt in Z 3 for some time.

I get anti - anti APR when people just keep puking out that it's all about the HORNS (antlers, by the way ). There's so much more to it than that but its a convenient way to put a negative spin on APR.

[Getanet]

APR doesn't have to mean 4 or more points on a side EVERYWHERE. It could be 3, or whatever was appropriate for each area."

There's so much more to it than that but its a convenient way to put a negative spin on APR.

I propose a statewide APR of "at least one antler at least 3 inches long."

There's not really much more too APR than that. I'll grant you there is much more to QDM, but not APR.

[Jameson]

...Well if you have 500,000+ hunters in the woods, and the majority of them are willing to shoot a doe, or a spike buck, then you convert them over to 500,000+ head hunters that will only shoot large rack bucks, now the competition for large racks starts tenfold from what it is now. Then you will have trophy hunters from thoughout the country coming here, then you will have pretty much all land leased to the highest bidder. No more cheap deer hunting. Poaching will increase as well. Supply and demand. Right now we have a majority happy to shoot a doe, a forkhorn, or small basket racks, and you want to make it mandatory to shoot large racked deer.

When one of those doe hunters shoots a doe, it might take out a big racked buck three years later. When one of those spike hunters shoots a spike, it might take out a big racked buck two years later. Those hunters are shooting the predecessors of large racked deer now. The biggest change would be that there would be more large racked deer. The pressure on the herd, in your example - where you kept the numbers of hunters consistent, would be the same. So, sure maybe the number of hunters targeting large racked deer would increase, but so would the number of targets. Pressure thus remains the same.

Then you switch it up and say we are adding trophy hunters from around the country, and that will cause all the land to be leased to folks with deep pockets. So? We live in a Capitalist society if you haven't noticed. People here like to make money. Are you against that? I don't think it will happen here anyways...

It sort of the Minnesota passive aggressive thing here isn't it? You think leasing land is bad, don't want to outright ban it, so you just create a scenario where no one will want to do it. How Minnesotan of you!!!

If poaching increases, so what? Are you saying that puts hunters in a bad light?

So you are saying we could have the best hunting in the country, but you don't want it because you don't want people making money from owning land. ok, whatever. And if we wouldn't have the best hunting in the country then why would everyone flock here? If we have big deer and someplace warmer then us has big deer, then most folks are going to choose the warmer hunt. And we are normally colder then most places.

Also, I don't want to make it mandatory to shoot large racked deer. Besides being anti-APR I am also anti-forcingpeopletohunt. About the only mandatory got to shoot a deer hunting rule that I can think of that I support is the Earn a buck rule. It wasn't too long ago I was getting chastised here for suggesting a late doe hunt in areas with too many deer by the folks that couldn't handle the thought of shooting a buck without it's antlers.

[Wanderer]

There's not really much more too APR than that. I'll grant you there is much more to QDM, but not APR.

I must have missed your better proposal than APR to reach some sort of QDM that the general public can follow...

...and 'round and 'round we go...

[Scott K]

I guess I can be happy, and satisfied, and consider my hunt good, even without a headress to hang on the wall.

[Getanet]

I must have missed your better proposal than APR to reach some sort of QDM that the general public can follow...

I don’t have a better proposal because I don’t think it's necessary. I fall in the camp that prefers to let the individual choose what is and isn’t acceptable to shoot.

[PurpleFloyd]

There's so much more to it than that but its a convenient way to put a negative spin on APR.

Expand on that.

[tfran123]

What he said below!

When APR was first announced for SE MN, I had mixed feelings. Yes, I wanted to see the bucks get chance to mature instead of having to run the gauntlet every year and hardly ever see mid sized 8 pointers like I've been seeing lately but I also knew the money would likely follow. The money reason was the only reason I've said, "If we're going to have APR, make it statewide" to spread out the competition. APR doesn't have to mean 4 or more points on a side EVERYWHERE. It could be 3, or whatever was appropriate for each area.

Happy other don't need a deer "headress", more want it than those that don't. I not know anyone that hunts and has years under his or her belt not wanting a nice buck once an awhile. But the anti APR guys will continue with the horn porn line of defense which is a joke.

[tfran123]

Open your mind and read all 20+ pages of this. It ain't hard.

[PurpleFloyd]

Open your mind and read all 20+ pages of this. It ain't hard.

Oh my mind is open. You just haven't done a very good job of making your case.

[tfran123]

Thanks for laugh.

[Big Dave2]

Open your mind and read all 20+ pages of this. It ain't hard.

Someone's mind needs to open for sure.

[duckster]

QDM Get rid of party hunting, shot a deer and you are done, Might limit the harvest of the smaller bucks and be an incentive to let smaller ones walk if you want a big one knowing your hunt is over if you harvest one?

[Jameson]

I guess I can be happy, and satisfied, and consider my hunt good, even without a headress to hang on the wall.

Are you trying to imply that I can't be?

What would make you sad, unsatisfied, and to consider your hunt bad?

I tried and tried to write what makes me sad, unsatisfied, and to consider my hunt bad, and the best I can come up with is that I've now had enough happy, satisfying, and what I consider great hunts to know that what we typically have here is very boring hunting. I don't expect it to be great, just better then it is.

[PurpleFloyd]

Thanks for laugh.

Case in point.

[nonteepical]

you guys ask for facts, and say prove this, prove that, and when they are given to you can't disspute anything about what APR's accomplish and try to understand one FACT on all this, is that your sucess rate for shooting a buck DOSEN'T CHANGE. It's the same with APR or the 3" rule, although i'm thinking you guys are kinda partial to 3".

[tfran123]

Great, king pot stirrer has also made sure that he got the final word. Ironic you never make a point just attempting to dispute anything that infringes your rights.

As a non-big government guy I get that, however in this case I can't stand the fact that a percentage of hunters ruin it for the rest of us by over harvesting yearlings. No worries I'm prepared for canned response "show us the evidence", "you need a big buck behind every tree". So predictable it's boring but we'll keep playing with you.

[TruthWalleyes]

I tried and tried to write what makes me sad, unsatisfied, and to consider my hunt bad, and the best I can come up with is that I've now had enough happy, satisfying, and what I consider great hunts to know that what we typically have here is very boring hunting. I don't expect it to be great, just better then it is.

Very sorry to hear that.

My old man used to tell me, and i think of this statement all the time:

"It is what you make it"

I try to apply that statement to my daily life.

[B. Amish]

i almost feel like switching to the pro apr side just to help you guys out with your argument.

[mntatonka]

I can't stand the fact that a percentage of hunters ruin it for the rest of us by over harvesting yearlings. No worries I'm prepared for canned response "show us the evidence", "you need a big buck behind every tree". So predictable it's boring but we'll keep playing with you.

Are you prepared? Because you still haven't shown any proof of high yearling harvest in Minnesota, simply because it doesn't exist. The numbers the pro-APR guys continually spout off like "75% of yearlings are killed each year" simply isn't statistically possible. It's not even statistically possible for 75% of the buck harvest to be yearlings.

[tfran123]

That's right it doesn't exist, so who is right?

Not possible that 75% of buck harvest is yearlings? Why not? Is it somewhere between 50% and 70%. NO DOUBT. It's that rate in every on APR state that tracks it, don't believe me just look it up. I've posted MI numbers and they are right there.

I know MN hunters are way more selective, right?

Wow, MN numbers aren't available so you want to just deny, pretty funny the ignorance displayed.

Just tell me why it's not statistically possible to have a 75% buck harvest made up of yearlings? Not saying its that high but it's over half.

[B. Amish]

because the majority of bucks harvested are fawns.

[tfran123]

Most states categorize "bucks" as those with legal antlers, fawns don't make this bucket.

[tfran123]

Furthermore, and it's very standard, you categorize the buck harvest by those animals that you can put your buck tag on. Of those I'm sure MN is between 50-70 percent harvest, those line up with the old data and other non-APR states.

[TruthWalleyes]

i almost feel like switching to the pro apr side just to help you guys out with your argument.

Be sure to sign up for qdma

[Getanet]

Just tell me why it's not statistically possible to have a 75% buck harvest made up of yearlings? Not saying its that high but it's over half.

Let’s say it’s 100%. All you’re talking about is harvest, not how many remain in the population. Across all zones and weapon types, only 17.2% of hunters shot a legal buck in 2011, 19.3% in 2009 (I couldn’t find reports for 2012 or 2010). To put that another way, more than 8 out of 10 hunters in the state don’t shoot a legal buck in MN in a typical year. Any way you want to crunch the numbers, the majority of bucks don’t get shot in MN. And if the percentage of yearlings are as high as folks claim, once a buck makes it through the first 1.5 years his chances of dying at the hands of a hunter are very low.