Hunters who want better bucks in zone 3

I got this in an email today and thought I would pass it on here

Hunters who want better bucks in zone 3, here’s your chance:

Gentleman, your response to my previous e-mail was very successful. Since then, yearling buck protection (APR’s) Antler Point Restrictions has moved forward from DNR Big Game Manager, to Chief of Wildlife, to Commissioner… and finally to upcoming DNR input meetings. (Dates, times, locations below) We need to be there in force. If we get enough supporters to these meetings AND everyone sends e-mail support for APR’s/ yearling buck protection to: [email protected] … for the first time in history, we will have yearling buck protection in zone 3.

(We need it now more than ever. A national 2010 QDMA Whitetail Report shows Minnesota now leads the nation with 67% of our annual “buck harvest” being yearling bucks. (Source-2010 national QDMA Whitetail report, page 11) Minnesota also leads the nation in fewest 3.5 yr old bucks in the “buck harvest” at only 10%. 87% of the antlered bucks are dead by age 2.5 in Minnesota. Clearly, young bucks need protection here. Google it, check out page.11.)

Again, dedicated people and years of effort have gotten things this far…but we can’t do it all…we need support from those who want better bucks. We need ALL OF YOU, to send supportive e-mails to [email protected] supporting APR/yearling buck protection and ALSO to attend the upcoming DNR input meetings to fill out the input questionnaire that will be handed out there. (This will be crucial.)

We are the majority now. The 2001 DNR survey, p.48 shows a majority (58%) is for protecting small antlered bucks, (only 18% strongly oppose). The 2005 DNR survey, p.33 shows the majority (66%) is for regulations that would increase the number of antlered bucks in the population, (only 13% oppose). The 2009 Zone 3 DNR survey shows a majority (53%) for yearling buck protection. DNR leaders Marrett Grund and Lou Cornicelli are willing to move forward on this. SUPPORT THEM and get to as many of these meetings as possible and do your part to punch this through. This takes effort…do your part. Let’s roll and get it done.

DNR public input meetings can also draw opposition. The “minority” groups opposing yearling buck protection are likely organizing substantial opposition for these meetings as a last stand. YOU and your buddies need to send e-mails to the DNR e-mail address above and be at these public input meetings to shut them down or we could lose everything here. Be civil and fill out the questionnaire. I’ll say it again…if you want better bucks in zone 3…don’t leave us hanging now. If you do, don’t complain later.

Meeting dates, times and locations in zone 3 are:

– Feb.23, 7-9 P.M, Frontenac Sportsman’s Club, 30301 Territorial Road, Frontenac.

– Feb.25, 7-9 P.M, Houston Community Center, 109 West Maple Street, Houston.

– Mar. 9, 7-9 P.M, LaQuinta Inn & Suites, 1625 Broadway, Rochester.

Send E-MAIL supporting APR’s/Yearling buck protection to: [email protected] Work together. Get people to those input meetings to fill out the questionnaire. Support Lou Cornicelli and Marrett Grund in creating a better Zone 3. Thank you.

TAKE TO MEETINGS: Here are some “civil, factual responses” to common objections to yearling buck protection (APR’s)

1.) “This is all about growing trophy bucks”…

Reply… Absolutely not, 4 point APR’s protect yearling bucks. Yearling bucks don’t make the trophy record books. 7 pointers and above are legal to shoot… clearly, this is not a trophy buck program.

2.) “I don’t want to be told what kind of buck to shoot”…

Reply…you are entitled to your opinion but you are in the minority now. A strong hunter majority disagrees with you according to the 2001, 2005 and 2009 DNR surveys. Their opinions count too.

3.) “I want to be able to shoot the first buck I see”…

Reply… the majority of Minnesota deer hunters today disagree with you. In the 2001 DNR survey statewide only 8% said their primary goal was to shoot “any antlered buck”. (2001 DNR survey, Page 14)

4.) “Kids should be able to shoot the first buck they see.”…

Reply… Youth hunters 17 and under are exempt from these APR’s.

5.) “We’ll have difficulty in ‘seeing’ if a buck is ‘legal’ or not before he gets away.”

Reply… Turkey hunters, duck hunters, pheasant hunters, etc., all share and accept the often difficult responsibility of clearly identifying fast moving targets before they shoot. Deer hunting shouldn’t be any different. This is a basic tenant of hunter safety.

6.) “This is all about antlers, you can’t eat the antlers.”

Reply…The DNR has said over and over they are not in the business of growing trophy antlers…the DNR will tell you that yearling buck protection is first and foremost about balancing the number of males and females harvested each year. More mature bucks are a ‘byproduct’ resulting in both more meat and more antlers… everybody wins.

7.) “APR’s will benefit only the ‘bowhunters’ or the ‘select few’ trophy hunters.”

Reply… Harvest reports show the vast majority of bucks fall to gun hunters. Archery buck harvest is minimal by comparison. Also, only 13% of Minnesota’s hunters statewide consider themselves exclusive trophy hunters (2001 DNR survey, p.14). Bottom line: Gun hunters/average hunters kill most of the bucks. Therefore the average hunter will always be the biggest winner from ANY program that creates bigger bucks in Minnesota, not the ‘select few’ trophy elitists.

8.) “APR’s promote antler high grading.”

Reply…Females carry 50% of the antler genes and significant numbers of bucks of all types (carrying big-small or average antler genes) survive and breed every year. Also the Mid-western gene pool is very solid (i.e any 3.5 yr old buck will have a decent rack) so it seems unlikely that APR’s would stand much chance of causing antler high grading. High Grading is a debate and as of yet is unproven.

9.) “Hunters are giving something up with APR’s”

Reply…In Missouri (which is nearly identical to Mn. in habitat acres, deer numbers, hunter numbers, annual deer kill and a peak rut firearms season ) hunter support has gone from 40% to 85%, and added 34 counties to the original 29. Clearly these hunters feel they have gained something…not given something up. Same with Pennsylvania.

Steve thats cool I am all for bigger bucks just don’t change the dates, so the BOW hunters have the RUT all to them selfs. And kick the rest of us out of the woods

Steve,
who’s the nut job that sent this out? I like the way he selectivly chose numbers from the DNR’s website to make it look like armageddon.

I am not 100 percent sure but I believe it originated from the MN Deer Hunters Association.

I am not 100 percent sure but I believe it originated from the MN Deer Hunters Association.

Hey Randy one of the things they are going to talk about at the meetings is how guys would feel about letting hunters 55 and over to use a crossbow during the bow season, what are you thoughts on that?

I wonder how they know that only 10% of the bucks taken are 3.5 years old? I’ve never seen the nice bartender lady who registers our deer walk outside. They just ask if it’s a buck or doe.

The DNR had folks out at alot of the registration sites checking teeth and recording other data this past year.

Quote:

---

Hey Randy one of the things they are going to talk about at the meetings is how guys would feel about letting hunters 55 and over to use a crossbow during the bow season, what are you thoughts on that?

---

Not sure on that one yet Steve.Will have to chew on it for awhile. Maybe 65 and older

I think that this is a great thing, and its about time that MN starts to become a little more proactive in their wildlife management. This is only a small step but a step none the less.
I hunt in northern Missouri, where there are antler point restrictions, and let me just say that the number of nice bucks killed there is astounding, with some truly giant deer in the mix. If this would get passed I think people would be amazed at the number of 130″ to 150″ deer that they would start to see in just a few years.

I have to hand it to The Missouri Department of Conservation, they are very proactive and utulize many different tools to make their state one of the leading states in the country for conservation movement. In the mid 1980’s they passed a bill, similar to our 3/16ths bill of a couple years ago, which boosted and promoted many of their DNR programs. Its amazing to go down there and see state or public land with food plots managed for the wildlife. The DNR will allow farmers farm the land, with the understanding that a certain portion of the crop will be left standing over winter, and that they cant harvest a certain food plot till a certain date, month, etc, etc. Also their automated registration is amazing for deer and turkeys. I harvested a buck in september and when you register the deer you provide the date, am/pm, county killed, number of points on the deer, etc. What a great way to provide large amounts of information at a low cost.

I am happy to see MN taking steps forward, and by having antler restrictions in place, it will by no means take away anything from the chase or excitement of the hunt. Instead it will make people appreciate the majestic whitetial even more, and instead of shooting right away, allow them to watch and learn even more as hunters.

Couple pics from Missouri early season last year. None of these bucks were shot by us. Not sure about the neighbors, but the last pic shows that both of those bucks arent even legal. Of the 22 bucks that we had on camera, 14 were shooters, aka over 130″ I harvested a 148″ my buddy shot a 156″ 8 with split G2, and his cousin shot a 138″ 8 pointer, and not a single deer was on camera. Starts to make a man think….
Charles

Quote:

---

I am not 100 percent sure but I believe it originated from the MN Deer Hunters Association.

---

oh gee theres a shock

Just an FYI for everyone I did not post these topics to start a big debate here, I am trying as much as possible to keep my personal views to myself here, most of you already know where I stand anyway. I posted the info on the meetings so both sides can show up and have there opinions heard. Here is the link to the on line survey.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/pubin.html

Thanks for posting the survey Steve along with all the other info!

If you can not make it to one of the meetings you can fill out the survey on line.

LINK

Quote:

---

Just an FYI for everyone I did not post these topics to start a big debate here, I am trying as much as possible to keep my personal views to myself here, most of you already know where I stand anyway. I posted the info on the meetings so both sides can show up and have there opinions heard. Here is the link to the on line survey.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/pubin.html

---

Sorry Steve, and not meaning to attack you. However, when a word-for-word quote is taken from a political, outdoor lobbyist group, that has a vendetta, then that post is going to be debated. It has nothing to do with you, unless you are a flag bearer for that lobbyist group.

I think we should push this further and make it illegal to shoot any fawn/yearling whitetail animal. I also think bow hunters should be restricted to only bow hunt in October too.

Isn’t a vendetta a blood fued ??? I think a better term would be a “proposal”…

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Just an FYI for everyone I did not post these topics to start a big debate here, I am trying as much as possible to keep my personal views to myself here, most of you already know where I stand anyway. I posted the info on the meetings so both sides can show up and have there opinions heard. Here is the link to the on line survey.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/pubin.html

---

Sorry Steve, and not meaning to attack you. However, when a word-for-word quote is taken from a political, outdoor lobbyist group, that has a vendetta, then that post is going to be debated. It has nothing to do with you, unless you are a flag bearer for that lobbyist group.

I think we should push this further and make it illegal to shoot any fawn/yearling whitetail animal. I also think bow hunters should be restricted to only bow hunt in October too.

---

Why do you think this is a good thing ? Just let us bow hunters hunt in OCT ???? But you would rather have the gun hunters hunt the rut and shoot every deer they see
Don’t get me wrong I hunt gun and smoke pole season but the bow hunters are not the problem and how many more deer would live if we could only hunt the rut with bow in hand I will say it one time IOWA has it going on and maybe MN dnr should start thinking of the hunter and not the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Maybe they should just let the Gun hunters hunt the last 9 days of sept . I would say by moving the gun hunt out of the rut would help.
Now for the point restriction ask UP MAN how that works for them in Michigan.

The information that I’ve heard about the meeting last night in SE, I’m really starting to think the main focus should be taken off adjusting the seasons and regulations but rather, how long until our top dogs in the whitetail wing have left in their positions. Change is not a bad thing!

HOLY CRAP!
I got a Big G, Gman, and Little G.
That’s a lot of Gs!

Vendetta: YOU BET! Reason I have a problem with this, is for this soul fact:
You have a lobby group, that has no educational backgroun in science or biology, trying to decipher what animals should be shedding blood and which animals shouldn’t…….All because their little, small area in “zone 3” is “similar” to “Iowa”. This LOBBY GROUP is pushing to change ALL of zone 3 to mimic Iowa and their natural habitat and climate. There is a huge climate/habitat difference between the flat land-corn fields of middle Iowa, with minimal woods, then there is in the upper region of Zone 3. I’ve been to Iowa many times. They don’t need to hunt the rut……..they just do massive deer drives…….pushing corn fields.
YEP! YES! I took a small snap shot of Iowa deer hunting, and lumped it into the whole state. SAME POINT that this LOBBY GROUP of non-scientist and non-biologist are trying to do, to make their area a trophy buck zone.

My statement of only allowing bow hunters to hunt during October was tongue-in-cheek. But it is a shot across the bow, as there is a HUGE anti-gun hunt during the rut being pushed. Like I said, if you want TROPHY hunting, then all fawns and yearlings of either sex should be untouched.

I do have a lot of anger towards this because all aspects of “hunting” traditions are fully flushed down the toilet. It is sad. Very sad….. Very sad when lobbyist are shoving their minority opinion of non scientific/biological data down the DNRs throat.

This is hunting……if you don’t want it to be hunting, then get a camera and “shoot-n-release”.

Just copied and pasted what I posted on the fishing site over to here too as it seems fitting.

RRR, I’m really not sure what you are looking to hear out of the “HC Bow Guys”. I’m a bowhunter, and I don’t hunt either of the November guns seasons in MN. Am I against gun hunting or gun hunters? Not at all. I just choose to bowhunt in other states during the November month.

Why would the HC bow guys really care either way if these laws are passed or not, they are most likey already doing this in some form or another already? That’s why I don’t think your getting much discussion on it. If it’s law or not it’s not going to change anything for them, besides the potential to see more aged class deer on the hoof. Maybe I’m wrong but that’s how I feel on the subject.

I’m a MN resident and a Missouri landowner where the 4 point minimum has been put into place for a few years now. I love what it has done down there as far as the amount of older age class deer seen on the hoof each year. I’ve hunted all over this country for nearly 20 years and I can count on both hands the amount of 3+ year old clean 6 or less pointers I’ve layed eyes on and none of them were in MN. So in my opinion, the case for this rule only promoting the passing on of poor genetics doesn’t hold water with me. I’m only 1 hunter, and I average about 70 days a year in a tree and all I can tell you is what I’ve seen with my own eyes.

With that being said, I can totally see the other side of this too. I don’t think the DNR should be able to tell a hunter what they can or can’t shoot, especailly on their own land. Like I said above, I’m a Missouri landowner and one glaring difference I see in zone 3 vs. MO is that in MO I can buy a tag for antlerless deer over the counter. Some of these hunters in zone 3 have to apply for an antlerless tag and don’t have the option to shoot an antlerless deer every year. That makes no sense to me. These proposed zone 3 rule changes would probably be an easier pill to swallow for some if the playing field was leveled, and it isn’t.

RRR, I get the feeling you are trying to make this into a bow hunter vs. gun hunter thing, which in my opion it isn’t. From reading your posts on here and the hunting site, it seems obvious that you don’t get a long with some bow hunters that you share hunting property with. I really don’t think its fair that you are throwing the entire bow hunting population under the bus because you don’t get along with a few. Maybe I’m wong but that’s the impression I get by reading some of your posts.

I know I left my opinion on some other areas of this hole thing off this post. I’m more then willing to share my honest opinion as a bowhunter as long as this stays a discussion and not a p!ssing match between gun and bow hunters. And just so everyone who’s reading this knows, I’m not a member of Bluffland Whitetails nor am I a member of the MN Bowhunters Association.

Quote:

---

The DNR had folks out at alot of the registration sites checking teeth and recording other data this past year.

---

Winkels;
where did this take place?
In 26 years of deer hunting, I have NEVER had the Cannon Ball in Cannon Falls, MN or the Holiday Station in Hastings MN EVER look at any animal shot.
It is common knowledge that the Cannon Ball NEVER looks at any animal. So, if the registration sites are NOT inspecting teeth, and the DNR is performing a “small, snap shot review”, again there is no scientific data…

IMHO.

I am a firm believer that we need to move the gun hunt out of the rut, but I do not think this is the primary factor in buck ages in MN. I hunted both states within 2 miles of each other for a number of years. The difference in bucks is significant and is the reason I choose to spend upwards of $500 for an Iowa tag. The reason for this difference, again in my opinion, is peoples ATTITUDES.

Everyone I talk to in MN is hunting deer, everyone I talk to in Iowa is hunting bucks. They choose to pass on smaller bucks in Iowa, where in MN the “Its brown its down” mentality seems to be much more prevelent. I do see this changing with our older hunting generation is fading from these hunts, but it will take time.

While I make a concious effort to pass on smaller bucks, I also do not feel “Big Brother” has the right to tell me which buck to shoot.

If you choose to pass on smaller bucks, great and I agree with you, however, you do not have the right to tell me how to hunt, and I will not tell you either.

I agree with you farmboy, but also Iowa has a draw maybe Minnesota should do that in some zones.

Quote:

---

I agree with you farmboy, but also Iowa has a draw maybe Minnesota should do that in some zones.

---

Agreed. Draw for a buck tag, eliminate cross tagging (not enforceable, but keeps honest people honest), and eliminate bow hunting during the rut.

OK, not the last one, but I like to see if your paying attention

Question:
Doesn’t Nerstrand and Itasca Parks have a “antler point restriction”? Meaning a buck has to be a 6pt or 8pt to shoot it? Maybe not anymore, but if not anymore, they did, right???
Hasn’t that been in effect for many years?

HOLY CRAP!!!! Those two parks must be CRAWLING with super-bucks????
Are they?

Correct me if I’m wrong……please do!
Please correct me if I’m wrong!

Quote:

---

Sorry Steve, and not meaning to attack you.

---

It is all good Gary I did not take it that way.

Quote:

---

Question:
Doesn’t Nerstrand and Itasca Parks have a “antler point restriction”? Meaning a buck has to be a 6pt or 8pt to shoot it? Maybe not anymore, but if not anymore, they did, right???
Hasn’t that been in effect for many years?

HOLY CRAP!!!! Those two parks must be CRAWLING with super-bucks????
Are they?

Correct me if I’m wrong……please do!
Please correct me if I’m wrong!

---

That is a good question Gary one that I do not have an answer for, I have never hunted a state park, hopefully some that has can chime in here.

One other thing I should clarify here is that the email in my first post did not come from BWA but looking back at it I can see where it would look that way. BWA did recommend the youth season and the no cross tagging of bucks but that is all. The rest of the changes came from other groups, as for the guys who do not want to see the gun season moved out of the peak rut time I do not think you have anything to worry about. Yes BWA and other groups would like to see this happen but the DNR has no interest in making any drastic changes to the dates.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The DNR had folks out at alot of the registration sites checking teeth and recording other data this past year.

---

Winkels;
where did this take place?
In 26 years of deer hunting, I have NEVER had the Cannon Ball in Cannon Falls, MN or the Holiday Station in Hastings MN EVER look at any animal shot.
It is common knowledge that the Cannon Ball NEVER looks at any animal. So, if the registration sites are NOT inspecting teeth, and the DNR is performing a “small, snap shot review”, again there is no scientific data…

---

DNR folks where outside Gander in Rochester and Good Sports in St. Charles.

I seen it with my own eyes but did not get a chance to speak the the DNR folks personally they where pretty darn busy. I asked a hunter registering a deer at one site and spoke to an employee at the other site. I hope I did not misinform anyone and apologies if I did.

They were in these same locations about 3-5 yrs ago collecting heads as well over the cwd scare.

If you watch the video on the dnr website about the proposed changes the state parks are mentioned. Yes they have point restrictions. I think you can jump right to that clip for the details.