Antler Size Regulations
Wisconsin
As many people have problems with in Wisconsin is seeing large bucks and even more so numbers of them. My question is why there hasn't been an antler size requirement implemented which some other states have successfully. Wisconsin has the most record book entries of any states by far, why not give everyone including non land owners a better chance of shooting a monster instead of the typical "Its brown its down". Anyone else have thoughts or opinions on having a minimum of 3 or 4 points on side to make it a legal buck?
The DNR will not go for an apr.Imo, Apr's put undo pressure on great up and coming 1.5/2.5yo's with great genes.Fact is older bucks carry cwd in a much higher % hence bonus bucks in the southern farmland zone. Book deer need to get to 3.5-5.5yo which Apr's don't help anyway. A 1 buck rule like Indiana or Ohio would have the effect you want not Apr's.
We already do.....it called 3". lol
I shoot 'monsters' every year. Monster 5 pointer, monster doe, my daughter even shot a monster yearling last year. These, along with all of the deer that we have harvested that YOU would've considered monsters. If your intention is to see deer with more points on their head, then yes, we should have APR's. The APR should be written as such: No deer with more then three legal points on one side my be harvested. A point is a projection that is at least one inch long( beam tip is counted as a point).
With this rule every eight point and above will remain for you and everyone else to see. If you don't like this proposed APR, then another method of seeing "monsters" would be to put in the time scouting and doing your homework, including finding a place that holds "monsters".
I agree with the three replies already here. Antlers are small around here for two years due to late springs and a harsh winter.
What is the difference in a buck with small antlers say 115" and one with 140" if they are both the same age?
There will be large antlered bucks taken this year but not much in the north. That will change after a few more years of recovery.
If only bucks can be shot up north how will it get better in a few yrs? I would think the buck population will get pounded. Qdm hunters will even shoot any buck just for venison. I'm all for 4 puts on one side, kids shoot anything.
The 2013 youth hunt took 6693 deer. Less then ML,Late season archery and the Dec. 4 day doe hunt harvest which were all above the youth hunt.
Mossboss, because the fact is we have more guys in the woods per square mile of available hunting land than any other state during gun season. Guys do not want to pass on a deer only to have the guy 75 yards away shoot it. Most bow hunters self regulate already, especially on private land. The gunners do not want to go home from the traditional deer shoot (not hunt) empty handed. I can't say I blame them given the impact of gun hunting in this state. I know, if I do not have a deer hanging by gun season, I will take either a doe or any antlered buck if I am hunting public land. That is why antler-less being off limits in the northern zone is a good thing. Hope it helps those guys for next year.
APR's will never go in this state and I'm fine with that. They don't do much for age structure and honestly the DNR could really care less about managing the herd for trophy potential. We actually had a great tool in place for this, it was EAB. But too many people bitched about it. While EAB wasn't intended to create older age class bucks, that was a great side effect.
Don't get me wrong putting in the time and effort is the number one thing. I'm not trying to find a way around that. But by passing the yearling bucks like some of you mentioned people take just to have venison. Will the number of 1.5/2.5 y/o shot increase, obviously yes. But the number of those bucks that will make it to mature ages will increase because there will be more of the younger age classes around. Will more "monsters" like i mentioned go up drastically, maybe not but the number of quality bucks easily can. I'm a meet hunter as well but only when it comes to does. I just feel that Wisconsin could really stand out in the country for quality and number of deer even with the extreme hunting pressure felt during gun season.
Oh yee of little faith. It will get better in a few years if we can get some mild winters. The heavy acorn crop around here is putting fat on the does. In a few years we will be back to shooting antlerless again.
Not all the bucks get shot, never have so age structure will improve. Slowly but it will improve.
I wonder what hunting pressure will be like this year. I saw no one out on the youth hunt weekend. I now of some camps that are not coming up north to hunt since the herd is down and no antlerless tags here.
Mark it on your calender and in a few years we will take a look.
If you want bigger bucks either go where they are or buy a huge piece of land and manage it for big bucks. Many of us don't really care what's on the deers head. Sure we like to shoot a big buck but a doe or little 6 point is just fine also.
The thing I never understood about APR is that say a 1.5 YO 8 pointer and a 1/5YO spike come in together, the 8 point is legal and the spike is not so the deer with presumably better genetics (if you believe mother nature prefers more points) will get shot and the spike will be allowed to live and breed, possibly never being more than a spike or 4 pointer.
Zinger is right. For those that need monster-bucks, you can go to a deer farm and buy one. Yes I've been passing some smaller bucks this year looking for one of the big boys but to anyone that's hunting please yourself, to heck with everyone else.
"that's hunting please yourself, to heck with everyone else." thats exactly what needs to change.
" I just feel that Wisconsin could really stand out in the country for quality and number of deer"
They have for 10 years in both areas and second place isn't close.
If a guy is tickled pink taking an immature buck great, he's out of the woods for the rut which is the best chance for a mature buck anyway. A growing % of hunters already pass young bucks. Maybe start educating antlerless hunters what a nubbie looks like as 1/3 of all antlerless harvested are nubs. Again, the DNR will not do Apr's for many reasons, cwd transmission being #1.
This same thread comes up every year. One of the guys here was pro-APR for years, even got some counties to introduce resolutions. Glad to see he's changed his tune.
When I first started hunting Northeast Region farm country about 8 of every 10 bucks shot were yearlings. Today, DNR aging data shows that number is close to 5 in 10 in my neck of the woods (and has been as low as 40 percent in the southern farmland region).
Texas leads the nation in the number of 3.5-year-old and older bucks shot, but should we care? They have almost five times more land area (yet only double the mature bucks) and "buy your deer" hunts there. Might as well go to a high-fence operation.
Voluntary QDM and much higher deer populations in farm country than we had when I started hunting add up to far more mature bucks than we had in "the good old days."
Who says you have to shoot those smaller bucks. I hunt public land and pass on smaller buck the last 5 years or so.
For those that say "well the next guy will just shoot the smaller ones" Well, maybe - maybe not. There are a lot of deer that are live through hunting season every year. But if I want to start seeing bigger bucks I can't shoot all the smaller ones and then wonder "where are all the bigger bucks"
To me it should stay MY choice on what I want to shoot. Not someone else telling me what I can't shoot.
APRs in every state they are used have worked to better the herd. Yes there are some hunters in each state that will never like APRs but you talk to those who hunt counties with APRs and their hunts are getting progressively better each year. EAB was the best way to keep the herd numbers in check but APRs are the best way to keep a healthy herd based on age structure. I always go back to EAB as a lost opportunity for WI because it did not need to be done away with, just used less intensely. And hunters needed to only shoot one antlerless deer instead of going on a killing spree.
" APRs are the best way to keep a healthy herd based on age structure."
The Dnr will strongly disagree as mature buck are the largest carriers of Cwd. that's why we have bonus bucks in the southern farmland zone.
The reason they have bonus bucks is to get hunters to kill more deer in those areas. Why would a mature buck have a higher chance of Cwd over a mature doe? Sounds like something they want us to believe.
The reason they have bonus bucks is to get hunters to kill more deer in those areas. Why would a mature buck have a higher chance of Cwd over a mature doe? Sounds like something they want us to believe.
RJN, plenty of links out there on the bucks / CWD situation.
No doubt APRs increase the number of 2.5yo deer but there are no biological reasons where APRs are a benefit to the overall health of the herd.
If some counties up north want it, push for it and give it a shot. But IMO it would be a negative in farm country, as explained here many times by many posters. A whole lot of "baskets with potential" would fall while possibly inferior scrub racks would be passed.
One of the reasons it improved things in other states is that those states had very high yearling buck mortality rates.
Wisconsin has seen a big decrease in yearling buck percentage of harvest the past three decades without APRs. "Let 'em go, let 'em grow" continues to gain steam while allowing those who don't care what size they shoot to do so.
Not needed in this northern area, or any area. Personal choice is best. In big timber and limited shot opportunity makes it not beneficial at all.
if you hunt in a group you can start there. start a big buck pool if you don't already have one going. fine the guy(s) who take anything smaller than an 8 with minimum spread or other characteristic. We too hunt public, so there is the chance the next yahoo parked 50 yards off the main firelane is going to take a crack at a smaller buck, but even if 50% make it past him it's worth it in my opinion. Has to start somewhere. That or start going deeper in the timber...bigger bucks are usually found where you don't find lots of pressure- obvious I know, yet many don't venture off the trails too far.
I don't know where you guys all hunt but in a lot of places I hunt there is no time to count points. I've shot many deer, with the bow, that I've seen for less than 10 seconds. And if I would have waited to try to count points they would have been gone without a shot.
It would also make driving deer very hard, ya I know there are a bunch of guys on here who think that would be a good idea because if you don't hunt the way they do you shouldn't be allowed to. It would also end a lot of still hunting as any moving deer would be almost impossible to count points on. If it was an 8 point rule I bet there would be a lot of 6 pointers without brow times shot and left.
The guys that say they never see big bucks are the guys that usually shoot the first small/descent buck they see. A few yrs of Aprs and everyone will see age structure improve and a more quality hunt even on heavily pressured land. Meat hunters can still drop all the does they want. Accidents will decrease because guys will think twice about shooting through brush, running shots, and long distance shots. Parts of Minn. Where Aprs have been implemented is gaining popularity and producing some excellent hunting.
"Meat hunters can still drop all the does they want" I love that line, if you're after meat you can shoot does but don't shoot any bucks for meat as we want them to grow so us serious hunters can shoot them when they have bigger antlers.
You really think accidents will decrease? Maybe when someone finally sees a deer large enough to shoot they will throw caution to the wind to try to get it? I thought that the years with the huge numbers of doe tags would result in more accidental shootings because of people shooting anything that's brown but my fears were wrong in that the accidental shootings were pretty much the same.
Nobody wants to be told how to hunt or what kind of equipment to use. That's evident by all the arguing on here about a host of topics. Now the same group of guys want to tell someone what they can shoot? You guys are funny, Ill give you that. Tell you what. Ill give in to your apr's when you guys get rid of your mechanical arrow launchers. You want to tell me what to shoot, then Im going to tell you what you can shoot them with. Perfect.
The closest thing to APR's this state ever had or will see was EAB. You would have a much better chance at pushing for that to get reinstated. It was an EXCELLENT management tool, that the DNR was too dumb to use properly.
I'm still in favor of eab every 3rd yr where #s are high. The problem with eab and Apr is hunters don't want to be told what they cannot shoot.
Ron stated "The "quality of the hunt" and "Excellent hunting" has nothing to do with age class or AR's or antlers"
Really? How many licenses would be sold if deer mutated and stopped growing antlers? Heck, some veteran grizzled hunters will even risk an illegal bait pile in order to rifle pound a sporty lil spiker! Did that one break 20 inches gross?
The Dec. antlerless hunt in the farmland zones prove guys would rather drop a yearling buck scoring 22 gross and have zero interest in doe hunting for meat. Antlers of any size drive this bus.
If deer didn't grow antlers they'd be treated much the same as any other vermin. Big deer are what keeps trees from getting tore out and turned into more farm land for sure, recreational land, mature forest stands, even wrp are taxed much more than agricultural use land. All that being said I don't think Wisconsin has a problem with hunt quality or needs ARs there's plenty of areas of this state that won't grow quality deer even with ARs and there's plenty of places that grow monsters every year despite not having ARs
With the growing support of qdm in the recent yrs I believe the majority of hunters would support Aprs. The brown it's down guys would be shooting more does instead of small bucks. Meat hunters would be happy along with mature buck hunters. Guys will start to see 3-4 yr old bucks and realize that the little ones grow when you don't pull the trigger. How on earth did Minnesota get it passed in some areas?
You really don't want to follow anything Mn. has done to the deer herd. Just google MDDI. They are a dumpster fire. 20 years ago they were #1 in BC entries and now they are a non event.
I always get a kick out of the guys that say they don't want to be told what they can and can't shoot. That's exactly what hunting regs do, unless of course you don't follow them.
RutNut, I follow the regs. Could care less whether anyone is impressed with my "buck". I dont hunt for social recognition.
retro, are you impressed with your bucks? I don't much care what others think of my bucks either but I don't feel any thrill shooting a 1.5yr old scrap rack either. I have shot my share of them and it just became less fun and challenging to do it. I have only harvested 2.5yr+ deer the last 4 seasons on my property and you can definitely see a difference, now that I have 5 nice 90"-125" skull mounts on my wall I am less thrilled with those "tweener" bucks as well. Time to move to protect up to 3.5yr old bucks at my place. I think if we got people to pass yearling bucks it would make a huge difference.
I am sure son will have fun in a few yrs when he starts hunting and there are a number of nice mature bucks running around. If they would of started protecting young bucks on my property 3-4 yrs prior to the start of my hunting career and there was a bunch of nice 2.5+ bucks running around that would of been fine by me!
I don't care too much about points or antler size, I want a quality healthy herd, I agree apr is not the way to go, we need to have the yearling bucks protected so they may grow. trust me you would have more fun if you didn't shoot those yearling bucks... ;)
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE,. From personal experience in Colorado with elk. They went from any bull to a 4 point rule, and in a couple short years we were seeing many many more bulls and a ton of bigger bulls.
I am praying for antler point restriction. You can have a quality hunt without shooting an immature animal. In fact it increases the animals you see if you do not shoot the first deer you see.
Elk are not whitetails. Many of the great gene 1.5yo deer already have 4 on a side. A yearling bull never has 4 on a side. Trophy bulls in Co. takes about 14 points in a draw area. Apr's for deer put undo pressure on great gene pool young bucks leaving the sporks walk. A baby step would be to end gun buck party hunting.Anyone care to bet that ever goes away?
Correct, don't shoot yearlings, especially the 9pt palmated yearling!
November +1, a ton of 3 and 4 to a side yearlings in farm country with the occasional basket 5x5. All would be legal under most APRs while the spikes, 3s and forks walk. Voluntary is the way to go, and aging stats show we've already seen a 40 to 50 percent reduction in yearling buck mortality since the days when most every buck seen was shot. Imagine the buck kill if hunters had the 70s/80s mentality!
If there is so many 1 1/2 yr Olds with 4 puts on a side why would anyone complain about Aprs? The only bucks that would have to be passed would be spikes, forks, and 6 ptrs. In our area though 1 1/2 yr old 8s are rare.
I have passed many bucks in my years of hunting. Lots of them. Ate a lot of tags. Its still nobodies business what deer I choose to shoot, as long as its legal. The area you hunt and the time you have to hunt are big deciding factors in what deer makes you happy. Not everyone can take off the month of November. I have very little time to hunt now. I also hunt mostly public land in the north central part of the state. If I get out 3-4 times this year that will be it. I to this point have had no time to hunt. How big of buck should I hold out for? Not complaining either as I have no desire to hunt a large tract in the south where the deer are coddled like farm animals until they are "big enough" to get social recognition for the hunter. Nothing wrong with guys that do this, just not for me. Hunting a 2.5 on public land up north is every bit the challenge of a 3.5 down south. I will shoot whatever deer makes me happy on that particular day, regardless of whether it meets other hunters approval. My advice to all hunters is shoot the deer that puts a smile on your face, and to hell with the critics. No matter what you shoot, someone will find something to bitch about. If its to big, someone will accuse you of poaching it.
Thrasher not all hunt for antlers. I still cant understand how shooting a doe is like something less than a deer with antlers. Its a deer.
Just for the sake of argument I’ll through this out isn’t bone a sign of maturity and health it is natural selection. I would love to see the day when we have old Roman nose pot belly bucks that are on the decline in health and in the antler department rooming the woods and we harvested them for that reason and that reason only. I say let them breed till they are to old and feeble and are de throned by the next monarch of the woods. Let the does choose the buck that breed’s them based on his show of strength and antler size the way nature intended.
We had APR when I started hunting,A 1" fork and 7 day rifle season. Back when I started there were a lot of bigger bucks up north,very few scopes,no treestands and not very warm clothing. Almost every body walked.
What is the difference between a 1.5 year old spike and a 1.5 year old with an 8 pt. rack? Both are still young inexperienced deer.
What most people pushing for APRs are hoping for is buck that has a rack that scores and is impressive. You then get into what does it take to get that size, how can a hunter tell what it takes to score 150 or 180, etc. Are you asking for inside spread? What if the local deer don't have the genes to grow the size mandated?
Why deny a young hunter a chance at a spike and turn him off to hunting? I have shot a lot of small deer and after a time raised my personal standards. I can let a deer walk thinking he might make it until next year and be bigger but then maybe not. Some deer do survive.
It's called hunting. Sometimes I get the one I want then sometimes I don't but I am glad that I had the chance to shoot some young deer to make my interest grow and set my own standards.
Kids 10-15 can shoot anything. After shooting a few small ones during that period, standards are raised while still harvesting does if needed. It's a win win all around.
When you teach a kid to fish and bring him out you start him on bluegills.
Are whiteails the bluegills of hunting?
Redclub, the no scopes is a big reason I think why there were more larger bucks many years ago. If the deer is 100yds away and has a small rack or it's rack is in the brush you can't always see it with out a scope.
RJN, It's not a win if a 30 year old guy doesn't care about the size of the antlers. And don't say that they can just shoot does then. Even if it's a small rack most guys still prefer a buck over a doe. Having them only shoot does only means they are passing up the bucks you want to shoot.
So to those of you that insist people only hunt mature bucks for the glory. What do you have to say about the hunters that have shot many large racked mature bucks and they haven't had one of them scored. these hunters don't do it for the "glory", they do it to match wits with an animal that is the ultimate survival machine, a mature whitetail buck. I know 5 hunters like this that are good friends, two of these guys don't even mount them. Just nail the antlers on a plaque. I know another handful of hunters but aren't close friends with them, that are the same way. One of them gives away 160" antlers for knife handles.
Yup, anyone that hunts mature bucks just does it to brag.
Rut, Well it shows that if you know multiple people that are doing this, then Wisconsin obviously has many places that can provide you with hunting like this if thats your thing. The land is out there for hunters to buy in an area capable of doing this. Many guys are hunting areas that will never contain any amount of deer in these classes, no matter what kind of rules.
I think a lot of people get really stuck on "the neighbors shooting my year and a half old bucks!" I used to have the same mentality, but I started thinking a little deeper into it. There are a couple main reasons it doesnt bother me so much.
1. If they choose to shoot a year and a half old, great. That means they will more than likely be out of the woods for the remainder of the year.
2. I'm sure everyone will jump on me for this, but I would much rather the neighbor (or whoever) shoot a year and a half old buck than an up and coming two and a half year old. Obviously killing a year and a half old buck will result in one less buck in the herd, but killing a 2.5 year old buck will take a buck out of the heard that will likely be a "shooter" the following year.
Just my opinion, and I still pass smaller bucks, but I dont let it get me all fired up like I used to. Takes away from the enjoyment of the hunt. I shot a few year and a half old bucks when I was younger, and I am very proud of each and every one of them. Putting an APR would have taken away my chance of harvesting those smaller bucks, which created great memories for me. Just my opinion.
" Many guys are hunting areas that will never contain any amount of deer in these classes, no matter what kind of rules. "
There isn't a county in Wisconsin that can't produce a 160 buck if they are allowed to see a 4th or 5th birthday.
"There isn't a county in Wisconsin that can't produce a 160 buck if they are allowed to see a 4th or 5th birthday."
Only one buck? :-)
I probably agree to a point but it is hard to get the bucks to 160 when the have been stressed as much as they have been around here with the hard winter, high predator numbers, high insect issue and poor habitat.
As I said before the buck I took last year was 5.5 years and did not even make 120. My cameras have been showing fewer and fewer larges bucks on them and I am seeing fewer in my travels and I am scoring way less than a few years ago.
I am not saying that it cannot happen here but shooting alone is not the problem. This area in 2012 had about 18 dpsm with a buck harvest of 1.6.
The majority of mature bucks anywhere will never break 140 gross. A 120 3.5yo does not automatically become a 140 4.5yo and then a 160 5.5yo. Most peak in the 130's.High fences grow 200 inch 2.5yos in perfect conditions and the best semen(genes). This is rare in a wild enviorment and random breeding.It is much easier to grow bone south of hwy 29 for sure.
The map simply shows significantly harsher winters and less nutrition north of hwy 29. The last thing nature will take care of on a buck coming out of a hard winter is growing bone.
Don't forget that the does genes contribute a lot to the potential.
"Don't forget that the does genes contribute a lot to the potential." Yep, they are always 1/2 the gene equation.Winter and nutrition play a bigger factor in growing bone.predators do as well as they tend to inhibit a buck seeing a 4th birthday. Ohio, Il. and Ia. put more in the book as a % of the buck harvest due to lack of winter and predators and great nutrition. If you choose to hunt north of hwy 29 or 8 it's no shock the odds of seeing lots of deer or taking a 160 goes down significantly.Multiple stats shows that.
What does would we be allowed to shoot? You don't want to shoot the ones with the better genes.
RJN-
How many bucks do you think a 10 - 15 year old kid will shoot in those 5 years that they would get bored with shooting "small" bucks? I know a guy that has been hunting every year since he was 12 and is now 23 that has only had the opportunity on 2 or 3 buck on a large block of private land in the north for both gun and bow seasons. He hunted on some other family land in Calumet County and saw more deer in one year than almost all of the other years combined.
Wisconsin will never have the size and number of bucks that States like Iowa have, we have a thing called winter here. Even the mild winters of southern Wisconsin are more harsh than Iowa and northern Wisconsin makes southern Wisconsin winters look like summertime. Throw in the abundance of predators in the north and it is surprising that anything can survive, let alone grow big antlers.
I hunt private land in Lincoln County that hadn't been hunted for several years before I bought it, it should be crawling with deer, it is in about a 70% ag area so the deer numbers should be high. I hunted most of the year on that property last year and never even saw a buck while hunting. I had 4 different bucks on camera with the largest a 7 point (picture attached). I really don't think APR's would make a difference on the size of bucks I would see, it would disgust me and most other hunters in my area and drive them away from hunting.
Actually it is more than 1/2.
"Wisconsin will never have the size and number of bucks that States like Iowa have" Iowa is not close in buck harvest numbers or book entries. Name a state that has the combo of buck harvest totals and book harvest better then Wisconsin. There isn't one.
"Iowa is not close in buck harvest numbers or book entries. Name a state that has the combo of buck harvest totals and book harvest better then Wisconsin. There isn't one."
Nov, being a "numbers guy, you have to look at total population, license sold and deer range in both of the states and factor in the number of entries. Iowa has around 300k herd, approx. 175k hunter and limited range. Whereas, WI has approx. 1.3 million, over 800k licenses and almost the entire state as deer range.
This might be a better measurement:
States with top B&C entries as a percentage of total buck harvest Indiana.................. 0 .084% Kentucky.............. 0.082% Kansas.................. 0.078% Iowa....................... 0.078% Illinois................... 0.065%
Another is:
2. MEASUREMENT: ?Hunter Density
This metric calculates competition for a trophy buck. We divided the total number of firearms hunters in each state by the total land area in square miles. Hunter densities ranged from less than one hunter per square mile (North Dakota) to more than 11 (Ohio and Wisconsin).
Five states received one point for fewer than 3 hunters per square mile, seven got .5 points for 3.1 to 5.5 hunters, two got .25 points for 5.6 to 10, and three got 0 points for more than 10 hunters per square mile.
Firearms Hunter Density North Dakota..............0.8/sq. mi. Nebraska.......................1.0/sq. mi. South Dakota...............1.1/sq. mi. Kansas............................1.4/sq. mi. Iowa.................................2.6/sq. mi.
http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/big-buck-zone/2013/05/new-whitetail-scale
Although I believe WI is a great place and has really nice bucks, other state do take a "trophy destination" more than WI.
FiveR's the winters really aren't THAT much more brutal between northern WI and Iowa. It's just that Iowa has pretty much no predators and more abundant food sources to help the deer during those winters. You take already stressed deer from cold and snow, add in a heavy predator presence and the herd is severely stressed. Then add to that a DNR that was refusing to loose the cash cow of doe tags until they absolutely had to, it gets even worse. If WI had a proactive DNR as opposed to reactive and only when they absolutely have to. We could have some of the best hunting in the country.
Geitz, agree with you to a point but also know that quite a few of Wisconsin's gun hunters are very casual. Those are the ones who buy a license but don't make much of an effort. So you can take the 800K number and probably cut it by a third, maybe more.
That said, hunters in states with very low hunter densities tend to see more mature buck movement by day (am being very general here). That makes Wisconsin's numbers even more impressive to me. In other words, it's most likely more difficult to see a trophy buck on the move in heavily-hunted areas (or states) than it is in lightly-hunted spots (or states).
Geitz i stated that in my post above the buck pic
Fivers- it sounds like Aprs is exactly what your area needs. The very few small bucks that are around your land would be protected and would be able to breed and produce more bucks. Why would you and your neighbors be disgusted that you can't kill the few small bucks in your area? If someone knows that there is only a couple bucks alive in their area and decides to kill one, how can they complain the following yr that there's no bucks? After a few yrs of Aprs, buck #s and age structure will improve. Brown it's down guys will realize they to have a chance at a mature buck and everyone excitement will increase.
What I meant by size and number of bucks was the percentage of "big" bucks, it didn't come out that way at all after I read the comments. There are more larger bucks for the population, due to less predators and easier winters. I don't know how Iowa could have as bad of winters as northern Wisconsin when the winters vary by a lot from northern to southern Wisconsin.
Don't get me wrong, Wisconsin has a lot of deer and some nice bucks. They just get stressed more over winter than other States, if the population would go higher, they would be stressed even more in the winter. It's a fine line we must tread on.
We see a lot of yearling 8pts and even the occasional yearling 10pt. These are the true future jaw droppers. They are also the dumbest deer in the woods as yearlings. These will be the first deer shot under AR.
"the winters really aren't THAT much more brutal between northern WI and Iowa."
That is good for a very big laugh.
Length limits and slot limits have changed over the years to provide better trophy quality fish why not do what it takes to get better trophy quality deer. Wait an extra year or two and you will get more meat for the freezer. Just like letting that baby gill grow to a nice slab.
If you want to be complacent with a state that the hunting is just ok when we have the habitat and the genetic potential that should rival any thing in the country has. Just keep doing nothing
Very few 1 1/2 yr Old 8s or 10s would be killed with aprs as they are rare overall. The last 2 winters have been brutal in my area and this yr we have more bucks around since I started hunting 23 yrs ago.
Bash no other state is close to sconnie book entries no rival?
Good thing we have Buffalo county to help pad the numbers. Self imposed AR does wonders. How do you think the Buffalo county outfitters make there money not by killing all the spikes forks and 6 pt 1.5 year old deer that is for sure.
November forever Ever heard of the tortoise and the hare the hare got cocky because he had a big lead and thought the tortoise would never catch him. Sounds like he was a Wisconsin hunter. Illinois and Iowa are going to smoke us if we let them. Sit back and do nothing and it will happen.
You guys need to hope MI's 12 new APR counties don't find the same success with APR's like they have in several counties here where they have been in force for a while now. If they do then its a matter of time before it is statewide and the surrounding states might look to follow suit if it is wildly successful.
Pray we fail because we are your neighbor. lol
"Wisconsin will never have the size and number of bucks that States like Iowa have"
" Illinois and Iowa are going to smoke us if we let them. Sit back and do nothing and it will happen."
??? Wisconsin puts more in the book than either of these states every year. They will never catch up due to shear numbers. Wisconsin takes about 80,000 more bucks then either state. I suck at bball but if you give me 120,000 chances(bucks harvested) at half court shots vs. Lebrons 40,000 chances I win every day, every year.Now, % of book deer/hunter? Sure, many states pass Wisconsin but most book entries it been Wisconsin for years. In lite mature bucks carrying most of the cwd apr's will never happen. A baby step for Apr would be a ban on gun buck party hunting and that wonderful tradition won't go away either.
Was against them, now with crosscompounds could care less. Maybe it is time to do anything to put challenge back into the hunt.
"Good thing we have Buffalo county to help pad the numbers."
Yes, BC is the top county in North America when it comes to book bucks, but more than half of Wisconsin counties have put giants in the books in the past decade.
Wisconsin with 23 counties among the top 50 in North American typicals entered since 2004, and 14 of the top 55 counties in non-typicals taken in North America over the past decade.
IF they were to do any kind of AR's I think it should be in areas with bonus buck. Something like your second buck has to meet certain criteria. But I still don't care for AR's for the exact reason Browning stated. A lot of very good genetic but dumb 1.5 year old bucks would not be protected. Not that they are now.
"Wisconsin with 23 counties among the top 50 in North American typicals entered since 2004, and 14 of the top 55 counties in non-typicals taken in North America over the past decade."
More proof Wisconsin is such a poorly managed state. Imagine if we had a good dnr? Too funny
November, Wi is great DESPITE our DNR, not because of it.
Really Rut? Because Michigan with too many deer can't grow bucks even close to as big as ours. I've hunted the county (Menominee) with one of the highest deer populations in North America for 25 years and a big 8-point there might go 120 inches if you're lucky. Many don't even hit 100 inches, or 130 pounds dressed. EAB opened up a lot of eyes as to what can happen when you "have to" pass up young bucks or any buck for that matter, and how the herd gets healthier when there's a better balance of bucks and does. Every WI Buck & Bear Club official I've interviewed in the past decade has directly credited EAB with Wisconsin's amazing rise in trophy bucks over the past 15+ years. It's more than coincidence that all of the top trophy-producing counties had EAB rules.
Naz, I have said in MANY posts that EAB was the best thing for this state as far as the great side effect of saving young bucks. If EAB would not have been abused by the DNR we would still have it. But it was used incorrectly and yet one more thing the DNR screwed up when it comes to deer management. So because the DNR didn't know how to use the best management tool they have ever had, it was taken away.
So yes if WI continues to be great, it will be despite the DNR. Many private land owners have more management skill and knowledge than the DNR.
Naz, still being the disingenuous outdoor opinion columnist it's impossible for you to some how try and tie the failed attempt that is EAB to big deer when every big buck producing county throughout the country so a rise that was on par or better than Wisconsins increases as a percentage during the time that EAB was implemented. You leave out so many other more important driving factors. Government doesn't create big deer.
My vote is for eab every 3rd yr in areas that support it and aprs state wide every yr. It's a win win for everyone and in a few yrs would be the best hunting ever in this state.
Rut, agree they should have backed off on EAB for a bit and we could have avoided this whole mess. I've long said every 3-5 years, factoring in if there are extreme winters or "voluntary" high-doe kills, etc., for the timing, would be great. Maybe every leap year in ag country to make it easy. Brudno, that's not me saying EAB played a key role in Wisconsin's rise, it was the two past top directors of the WI Buck & Bear Club, who saw more entries by far in EAB units than non. I agree government shouldn't get all the credit as obviously "let 'em go, let 'em grow" has grown every year. But, EAB opened the eyes for many. For us, one of the first seven units with EAB in '96, we immediately saw the benefits the next few years. Soon after, meetings were held with more "QDM-type" groups of landowners and hunters getting together to talk about it, and some formed "official" QDM areas. Some didn't, but loosely decided to pass small bucks unless it was a beginner hunter or old-timer, etc. Then from '04-'08, we had it four times in five years. A couple years later, two of the biggest bucks in the state came from our area, including the top typical in Wisconsin one year with gun. We are FAR from being a Buffalo County, and the area where the buck was shot not even half the landowners practice let 'em grow. But just the fact that so many had to pass on bucks when it got tougher for a gun-only hunter to get a doe for awhile really helped many figure out where to ride out the season once tipped off that the hunt was on.
