As for whether or not there are more big bucks in the UP? If that were true there would be a lot more entries in CBM coming from the yoop. And I don't see that happening. However I do believe the chances of seeing an adult buck in the UP are better than your chances of seeing an adult buck in the SLP.
So what's the point in mandating APR"s on the combo tag?
One thing it saves alot of bucks in early season and that will help get the breeding done.
Since the inception of the UP APR's, there have been a lot more hunters buying the single tags. Coincidentally, there seems to be more spouses that haven't hunted before also buying single tags, hmmmm.
If you think about it,it would be hard for someone to drive all the way to the UP and fill there wife's tag on state land.And make it back with out getting caught.Why would they even tag it.
Hope you have good luck Big Bear.
You realy are a Bear. LOL
Not all hunters that hunt in the UP come from the LP. There are a good number of us Yoopers that don't have to drive long distances to hunt God's country.
I am heading out this weekend targeting a doe and a mature buck, which ever shows up first. With APR or without, with QDM or without, I choose to not shoot any buck less then 3.5 yrs. I have high expectations but hunting is hunting. I hope you have a great season. Lew
Based on first hand conversations with DNR social biologists and big game experts, the combo tag was designed in such a way as to allow a deer hunter to take a deer on his first license, but then set the bar for taking a second deer high enough that it only was filled a small percentage of the time (5%).
At the same time, the DNR eliminated the "deer for camp" rule.
As a result: Hunters bought their "own" second license instead of Aunt Mary buying one for him, and could stay in the woods legally for pretty much the rest of the season after taking their first buck.
The Aunt Mary license was not a small issue. It happened a lot, and that is why the DNR found a solution that solved the problem with as little impact to the deer population as possible, creating hundreds of thousands of extra hours of LEGAL Days Afield for a couple hundred thousand hunters.
The Combo tags works.
I prefer to eat meat than make soup out of horns.
A. Mouse
The problem with that Lew is that this is absolutely unenforceable. Compliance is completely on the honor system. There is no way of knowing whether or not one tag, both tags, or neither tag has been filled unless the hunter checks the deer in.
Unfortunately, for all intents and purposes, if you buy individual tags, you can fill them both, with any antlered buck you choose, with no consequences.
KPC
Why do you say that does are easy to shoot? Deer are deer, and adult does are extremely wary animals.
How do you know that combo tag hunters don't already take the first legal deer that comes along in bow season? Oh, that's right, you don't know. You assumed it.
Why all the fuss? The fuss is about someone like you, trying to convince other people to buy into your big deer growth philosophy. We don't.
The reason you bring this up is to continue the discussion that you claim you wanted no more part of.
Strange way to back out, dontcha think?
This is the only thing you said that made sense.
" I just do not know what the reason is."
You should have started there and thought to yourself.... 'ya know, I just don't know why so I'm just not going to kick the hornets nest.
I say... Yes you did. I read it. It is right here,
"The reason I bring this up in this way is to show that with a little effort guys who say they could really care less about horn soup can easily get a doe!! Very easily as well. "
You didn't say they could "easily" get a license or permission to hunt doe infested private property...you said they could "easily" get a doe. You can't "get" a doe unless you shoot one. It pretty much is "implied". SO, yes, you did say it. BTW...getting a doe tag (antlerless tag) is not a guarantee that you will shoot one.
I recognize from your last post, that you now attempt to say what you really meant, but from your prior post, it reads pretty clearly. If you object to people taking you verbatim, you should proof read before you hit send. Why waste time trying to explain what you "really" mean in the subsequent posts. Explain it the first time so there is no misunderstanding. It works better that way.
Hammer says: "If I had unlimited doe permits I could have harvest 20 does already this year and only 3 bucks during the limited time I have hunted thus far this season. "
I say: whoo hoo... how fortunate for you. Good thing you don't have unlimited doe permits, huh?
Hammer says: "I never said any hunter does not take the 1st legal deer they see as you suggested I did. I was simple and precise in my questions. I did not lay out a bunch of statements in my previous post but instead made it a point to lay out questions. You will notice they are questions by the question marks that followed each question. It looks like this??? That means I am asking a question not asking you to attack what I said. Attack the questions if you want but you again put words in my mouth "
I say: You laid out leading questions with a presumed answer, but then you followed with the challenge question at the end "RIGHT???" What you did was not simple, it was rhetorical. It means you were making a statement in the form of a question and then expecting agreement or a challenge (well, you don't like challenges, so I guess it was just expecting agreement). Live with your words, Hammer, you write them, not me.
Hammer says: "As for people challenging my logic. I take no issue in the other forum of people doing so. What I take issue with is rude behavior and refusing to back up there replies to me when challenging my verifiable logic. Guys like you said my logic was flawed and gave opinion on individual issues. You said I was incorrect but you refused to provide any verifiable data or research to show I was wrong on any issue and that you were supposedly correct. "
I say: You make statements like "one and one is two" and then you base an entire illogical opinion on it. I gave you some research data on one of your "points" and you dismissed the source, the content, and even the way the science was delivered. I know your kind.... you could put solid research in front of you and if you didn't agree with the content, you summarily dismiss it. It doesn't pay to provide you with research, so I don't. Do you wanna go back and talk about why late dropping fawns really occur again? We could do that. Do you wanna discuss early dropping fawns too?
Hammer says: "I asked questions and asked several of them because I want to know the thoughts of hunters who do not like APR'S and what they feel toward the specific questions I laid out about harvesting does. You then pipe in with garbage about me assuming and blah blah blah and then telling me how I should have wrote something. Just don't answer my questions if you don't like the questions. "
I say: Lol... you asked leading questions to support a gotcha theory you cooked up. Your idea was that those poor dumb combo tag hunters complain about APR inflation from smart guys like Hammer, if only they would learn to pass on the bucks things would be better for all, but NOOOO, they are hypocrites and really only want to shoot bucks, they would never THINK of shooting does to fill their combo tags.
Do you really think that we pass on does if we have a legal tag to stick on em? Have you not read one thing we have written here in the past two weeks? First legal deer means FIRST legal deer.
I have an idea...if you don't want people challenging the garbage (you used the word, so I figure you won't mind if I return it) you write, then don't write it. Once you post it, its open for discussion. There are no side rules about what you think is rude and no side rules on what I think is just plain misuse of anecdotal information.
Go back and read your questions again and then come and attempt to tell us they weren't written with an agenda in mind. Right?? ?? ??
I can play that "I saw this" game too..
Last year a doe was in front of me for an hour and a half... would not come out of the tag alders, very wary... as I watched her, I sensed almost imperceptible footfalls in the wet leaves directly behind me. I could not look, so I waited... I could almost hear breathing behind me and didn't want a hoof to the head, or a bear claw to the neck, so I had to peek. Luckily it was just a huge buck which spun around and ran directly away from me into the swamp.
So..based on my anecdotal information, does are more wary that huge bucks.
Many hunters would be happy to see more quality deer, but if they only saw small bucks that were not legal, based on increased APR's, and they were not allowed to harvest them, their experience is going to be negative, especially public land hunters.
Private land owners ALWAYS have a choice. This choice should be extended to Public land hunters as well.
Where do you hunt? You don't need to be specific.
Keith
Traditional management requires restrictions on the number of antlerless deer taken from the pre hunt population, enough to keep the population in harmony with the habitat carrying capacity, but not so many as to reduce the overall population for next year's hunt.
APR, QDM, etc management takes into consideration the traditional harvest of a certain amount of antlerless deer AND then adds in the protection of young bucks in order to create "more" big bucks. In order to balance this additional male population to the habitat carrying capacity, it is necessary to further restrict the number of antlerless permits issued, in order to maintain equilibrium. This means fewer does in the herd, fewer fawns spawned and recruited. In addition, QDM (in its original form) advocates that the population of total animals be kept significantly "below" the habitat carrying capacity in order to assure that bucks have as much nutrition as possible, providing for quicker body growth, which allows more energy to be siphoned off for antler growth.
If you want to see more deer overall, Traditional management provides that. If you want to see more big bucks, but less deer overall, QDM provides that.
Its a management choice to arrive at what is more important, seeing a maximum amount of deer with a sustainable harvest , or seeing more big bucks.
This is an option for the archery hunter; not for the everyday, 3 day a year, public land, firearms deer hunter.
This may not be what Russ was referring to but it seems highly feasible that the ideas outside the box he is talking about are deer hunting regulation related.
I bought the bow tag and a gun tag. I can legally shoot a spike.
If a guy wants to vountarily pass up that spike,,, he's welcome to do that...... But he dosen't have to......
But now I'm restricted to killing only one deer during bow season. The DNR is forcing me to choose what type of restriction I want imposed on me. I choose to shoot a spike if I see one. Now I can't kill 2 does during bow season if I get a chance.
In the end,, they are resticting me on does.
If a guy wants to kill a spike,,, He can still do so legally,, Right ??
So any APR's in the U.P. are in fact VOLUNTARY. Hence the guys that voluntarily restrict themselves to shooting a buck with 4 points or more on one side..... would do so without the APR's even being in place..... So what's the sense of the APR's that are in place ?
What has restricting the harvest of does got to do with antler point restrictions ?
People who have lost their long time jobs and have little vacation time left can take 3 vacation days, (MTW of the first week, marry that up with Thanksgiving and Friday after days off, and have 9 full days of deer hunting up north with only 3 days of vacation burned.
Think of the boon to little northern towns who depend on hunter dollars to survive the winter.
Think of the Hunter Days Afield recreation opportunity.
What is so sacred about Nov 15th? Its just a day. And when it comes in the middle of the week, its pretty quiet in the woods.
Once a guy tags a spike with a bow.... What is to stop him from doing the same during gun season ???
Horrible system.....
-The New York State DEC deer biologist states there is no biological reason for statewide AR's in New York. The DEC does not consider there to be a compelling biological or management need for mandatory antler restrictions, and evidence from the pilot antler restriction program suggests no changes in participation that would provide economic benefit for communities in an area with mandatory antler restrictions.
-New Hampshire tried antler point restrictions and dropped it.
-Antler point restrictions were tried on mule deer in Colorado for a few years,,, and dropped.
Missouri state deer biologist Jason Sumners; "APR's protect yearling males and promote older bucks; Both yearling and adult bucks exhibit CWD at much higher rates than yearling and adult females. So reducing the number of male deer can at least help limit the spread of CWD"........
After APR's were introduced in Minnesota, the antlered buck harvest predictably dropped. But the doe harvest statistics were surprising. The antlerless harvest was down 20%.
According to deer ecologist Merrett Gund...."If the intent of the regulations was to decrease the population of the deer herd in those areas, It sure seems that according to the numbers it failed".
Those expanded regulations and frustration among many deer hunters led to another problem; A SHARP DECLINE IN HUNTER PARTICIPATION. More than 6% fewer hunters participated in the Zone 3 deer hunt (Where APR's were implemented); While hunter participation in the rest of the state increased.
Is it perfect? Probably not. But I happen to think folks that brake the laws are going to brake the laws no matter what rules are in place. Most probably dont even buy a license to begin with.
Does it go far enough to actually make a big difference? Definitely not. But keep in mind it was set up to appease MANY different interests. Not just yours and not just mine, but yours, mine, the DNRs, congress, the farm bureaus, and lord knows who else.
In the end whether you understand it, support it, or hate it, it will have an effect. In fact I believe it is having an effect. Its just that you have chosen to ignore them and/or dismiss them. I am quite certain if anything negative had happened over the last few years you would have been just as quick to blame it on the hunters choice system.
Another guy who lives in the U.P. says there's more bucks in the U.P. because of 3 mild winters in a row....
I don't live in the U.P.,,,,, But I can tell you I shoveled my driveway a total of one time last winter..... A mild winter for sure in Michigan.
As far as the tags being on the "Honor System"...... After 19 years of law enforcement..... I'd say (Just my opinion),,,, That it's a huge mistake to enact laws that leave it up to people to be on the honor system...... That's just human nature.
I'd rather see tags that are issued specifically for bucks,,, and tags that are specifically for antlerless deer.
What's in place in the U.P. is the hunter's choice of restrictions. Buy the combo tag; Have antler restrictions imposed. Buy a bow tag and a gun tag; and restrict the number of does you can kill.
Is it perfect ? No. Is it going to have an effect ?? I don't think so. Anyone passing up spikes or forks under this system would do so without this system in place.
How do we know most hunters are satisfied? There has never been a survey on this issue.
Do you have anything more to offer ??
So if I buy a bow tag and a gun tag,, I can only take one buck...... So what ?? The percentage of Michigan hunters that tag 2 bucks is about 5%......
That's a non issue.
Satisfied ?? I have a choice of restrictions. Buy a combo tag. Have antler point restrictions imposed on me.
Buy a bow tag and a gun tag. Now I can harvest any buck....... But I'm limited to one doe during bow season.........
Satisfied..... ?? Somewhat less than satisfied for me.
You should have known that.
Here's how it went down (condensed version):
1: NRC had a moratorium on QDM/APR proposals.
2: A certain "sportsmans" group approached the NRC with the proposal.
3: The group LIED to the NRC about the amount of support from UP hunters. I have first hand knowledge of this and let the NRC know about it.
4: No survey was done at this time. (A survey was done prior to the moratorium for the purpose of going to QDM UP wide. The survey came back with not enough support).
5: The head of the group attended the NRC meeting the month prior to the vote on the proposal. He was interviewed on local TV. He was visibly angry because it was obvious, at that time, the NRC was not going to be in favor.
6: The next month, the NRC voted in favor of the proposal. The vote was 7-0. What the HELL!
Interesting how politics works...huh?
Its not an "opinion" that the UP Sportsmen convinced the NRC to ignore their own APR plan for Michigan. Its history.
Its not an opinion that NRC Directors hunted in Club Country ranches with large bait piles, its history.
Your opinion that most UP deer hunters have reached a balance point is pretty subjective, and implies that you took a valid statistical survey of enough hunters to arrive at your conclusion. Did you do that? The onus of proof is one the one making the statement, not on the reader.
The rules are the same statewide. It bares mentioning that the "hunters choice initiative" is not an AP restriction. This is why it was exempt from the moratorium.
"You blast others for using personal observations for their opinions and not scientific studies."
Please explain to me where I did this. Are you referring to my observations of how the APR's were established? No scientific studies are needed as there is no science in the NRC decision.
By the way, one day, I saw 2 bucks and 1 doe. So, there must be a B:D ratio of 2:1. No, that's not right because I killed one of the bucks. It must now be 1:1. How's that for science.
I KNOW that a lie was told. I KNOW what was said was false. This is not an opinion, it is FACT.
"that you know the motives of the NRC and how the 100,000 UP deer hunter think"
I never said that. If I led you to believe that, I'm sorry. I don't have any idea of the motives of the NRC. It's just weird that it was one way, then a big turn around the next month, hence the "What the Hell" comment. This is not an opinion or fact, it's just a "what the hell".
As for the 100,000 UP deer hunters and what they think, I can only answer for the comments of those that I have talked with. It is fact that most of these hunters oppose APR's, some support them. Based on this sampling, it is my opinion that the UP hunters (I have only talked to hunters that also live here) are opposed to APR's. The previous survey did not have the support for QDM. That is a fact.
I really don't think we should have to state whether or not our statements are opinion or fact every time. I think we all have the ability to distinguish between them based on the statement. If there is a question, ask it.
Providing verifiable data or research or studies on this topic is pointless and one sided from what I experienced. It seems its because those opposed want to twist words and meanings to reflect they are correct rather than provide real research. The ONE time real research was provided against my statements it was used as a fact when it it in fact was no such thing.
I believe that our deer herds age structure and sex ratios are way out of whack and I base this off of the DNR'S own words and data. I believe the long term effects could lead to a watering down effect of the deer herds genetics. When the majority of the deer doing the breeding are the young it is unnatural. In a natural herd you have all age classes in fairly equal #'s and this ensure natural breeding by all the deer in the herd. Because young deer are normally suppressed by the bigger older bucks they breed much much less than the rest of the age classes. Nature intended it to be this way and it is this way in herds that are untouched by man. We have altered this natural order to the point where most of the bucks breeding are the young. We have harvested a large portion of the bigger bucks and the young are now the majority of the yearly harvest. Something like 85% of the buck harvest are 1 and a half year old deer. Doing this ensures the age structure will never be close to natural. The herds age structure can never get past an average age of 2 years for the most part because of the harvest rates of the 1 1/2 year old bucks. It can never be natural because a huge % of the young never make it to the age of 2 or 3 yrs old. Doing this also insures the young do most of the breeding. I believe that this could lead to issues over time. I believe it is common sense to look at the natural order and see that when it is changed to much there are consequences.
I believe we should be good stewards of the deer herd. Good stewards of the herd would keep the herd in as close to a natural age structure and sex ratio as possible. This would ensure the strong pass on there genetics in proper natural #'s. This would also ensure there would be no possible man made problem in the future. Man has interfered in other species at times, when we alter nature to much we have experienced severe consequences. We should be prudent and make sure that does not happen to our whitetail deer herd.
I do not support further APR'S at this time and still I was attacked by those opposed to APR'S. Yah I know, sounds crazy to attack one who is on your side on the big main issue. I believe in self imposed APR'S for all hunters who are willing to do so and are in such a position to allow them to still get a deer. It should not be a forced APR.
Giving the research or opinions to show the benefits of passing up young bucks on a voluntary basis seems to not be tolerated here. It is viewed as someone trying to educate the poor dumb hunters who do not know anything. It in fact was just a way to try to help others learn what CAN help if they want to do it. That is viewed as trying to shove some kind of QDM nonsense down peoples throat even though it was all voluntary. Anyone with these views is viewed as a trophy QDM horn hunter even though many who believe the way I do really do not care all that much about getting a monster buck. We just want to see more bucks. If the sex ratios and age structure were at a more natural level we would see more bucks. Its just a bonus that they would have larger antlers because there older and the genetics are more diversified. But even with all that it is pointless to continue the debate with the ones who do these things I mentioned
Happy hunting to all the respectful hunter/debaters out there. Do not fall into the trap of returning the irritation one may throw your way no matter how many times they do it. It solves nothing. It can be hard to ignore some who just will not back off and leave you alone. Don't fall into the trap. Again to all the RESPECTFUL debaters/hunters, Happy hunting and be safe.
God bless
