Repeal of the 4-point rule

A post from webstj on the hunting side that I thought I would repost here for more eyes to see.

Guys – Very important that you go here LINK and sign up if you want the APR (Antler Point Restriction) to continue its 3yr pilot program. Please ink in your name. I have had discussions with the Representatives who are trying to overturn this and it disgusts me to know what their political agendas are. The rep I spoke with talked to me like I was in Kindergarden and I corrected him on a half dozen political misstatements as well as asked him a half dozen questions he could not answer. Its one thing to not believe in the APR rule as everyone is entitled to their opinion. It is another thing to be choosing against it because a completely different agenda. “You wont find the cure for cancer if you dont put it through a trial” It is worth at least that much!

Thanks

i’m really indifferent on the rule, but I will say that the majority of the people I talk to that hunt the same area as me, are against it. in fact, i’ve talked to very few people that are for it.

It very much appears as a Bluffland whitetail association push for this. as it did when it was first authored.

this is something that people who hunt Zone 3, should be able to vote for. It is not right for the hunting practices that people have followed for years, to be changed like this, without allowing the public’s input.

and the bluffland white tail association does NOT equal the “public input”. since they are as one sided as can be on this issue.

personally, if the rule works, i’m all for more bigger deer, but a lot of people don’t care about antler size, they just want to shoot meat, and to them, they don’t care if it is a buck or a doe, and if a buck, how big it is.

it is just a very touchy subject. We are talking about a rule change that effects hunting for everyone, yet only producing the desired results for a few.

This never had my support and never will. People thinking that this will work in SE minnesota are sadly mistaken. It might work where hunter pressure is considerably less, but not down here. It was a hoax in inception and is fooloish in practice.

I hunt zone 3 and when I read about this was puzzled as to why they would try this here in the first place. My area is intensive harvest to begin with. I can purchase up to 5 tags and thought the whole point of this was to reduce the size of the herd and I was happy to oblige. I am there for a freezer full of meat. I could care less if it had a rack.

I passed on several bucks last year because I could not make out the number of points clearly. (hard to do while moving with no scope or a low power one)

My troubles are every year someone builds a house on another 40 acres that we now cannot hunt, or the buck hunters will not even let us walk the land to flush them out, or, the city folk who move to the farm area and also will not even allow someone from the party to walk through and get the deer moving. Not alot of hunters in my area stirring stuff up by the time the doe season rolls around.

Had a really good year thoug, filled all 5 tags for the first time! I had the hot seat on drives!

The climate is not right in MN for APRs. The DNR tried to institute a plan, it has not had great reception from many hunters in the area.

If the DNR wants to increase opportunity for larger deer start to draw for buck tags and eliminate cross tagging. Get people to want to save the tag for a larger deer, not force people to do what they tell them. You can lead a horse to water, but can’t make it drink

I personally think the DNR has no right to tell me what to shoot. I will, and have passed on smaller bucks but I hate “The MAN” telling me what to do.

Just wondering,,,, who are these “City Folk” you speak of? And why don’t they have the same rights to own land and do what they want on thier property that they probably worked real hard to obtain?

Quote:

---

I will, and have passed on smaller bucks but I hate “The MAN” telling me what to do.

---

X2….bingo!

I passed up a 6 pointer last year because of this law. He snuck up 10 yards behind me and started rattling his antlers against a tree like he was challenging me.

So you’re telling me I have to pass on middle-of-the-road bucks so they can get bigger. Got it.

Yet “sharp shooters” go out and commit indiscriminate genocide on the deer population in THIS EXACT AREA in the name of preventing CWD.

I’m confused.

Meant no offense by that. Heck I live next to the airport and MOA, I am a “city folk”. What I meant was what seems to be tree hugger types, I see em driving BMW’s down the gravel roads, who like being away from the hustle and bustle but want nothing to do with hunters or hunting.

Story told by the guys I hunt with from before I started hunting with them of a doctor type who bought a wooded hilltop and built a house there. He would not let any hunters on his property. (his right, I know this) The deer figure out this is a safe haven during hunting season and hang around there. They eat his landscaping and begin to damage his property. (we all know how this COULD be handled) no, he goes to the city council to complain about all the deer damaging his property.

These are the types of people I was refering to.

This was discussed for a few years before instituting and was also voted on and it passed! The majority have already spoken and a lot of money was spent before the rule was put in place, again the majority wanted a change! I to have talked with the representatives that Steve mentions and they do not have a clue on the benefits. The bill also takes away the rights of the DNR to make these decisions. Why hire biologists into the DNR if the legislature obviously knows more about fisheries and wildlife biology!

I personally think moving the season out of the rut is a better idea than the 4pt. rule but one or the other needs to happen. This rule is about a better quality deer herd that has a side affect of bigger bucks. If there are more bucks and less does, only the dominant bucks will do the breeding and the best quality genetics are passed on. Its simple biology that is not hard to understand. Some mentioned here that they just want meat, well shoot the does there are plenty of tags. Why the need to shoot that little 6 pt. to only throw his antlers into the corner of the garage.

IBTL…

Quote:

---

Why the need to shoot that little 6 pt. to only throw his antlers into the corner of the garage.

---

Why think that all a person should ever shoot is a huge buck? Maybe help out here with earn a buck. That supposedly works too. It seems to me that only those wanting year after year of shooting big bucks is for this garbage while the single deer hunter what should be allowed a choice is forced to pass on deer he might otherwise be able to take. What do the big buck hunters forfeit here? All this gimme crap by a select few doesn’t quite cut it with me and I don’t think I am alone. This legislator deserves a big pat on the back.

Where is the link to sign the petition to get this thing repealed!

Quote:

---

Some mentioned here that they just want meat, well shoot the does there are plenty of tags. Why the need to shoot that little 6 pt. to only throw his antlers into the corner of the garage.

---

I don’t give a rat’s about trophies. I hunt for meat. I didn’t see a doe this year. That 6 pointer would have fed my family this year.

My last comment.

I would prefer the season be moved out of the rut and you could shoot any buck you wanted. If we aren’t going to do that then the 4pt. rule is the next best option. This is about biology and the balancing of the deer herd not trophy’s and again the vote was already taken and the majority favored a change to the seasons. Let it play out its 3 years, remember this is a trial run people. In every other state this has been instituted by the 3rd year support was over 70% in favor of the rule. It works!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Some mentioned here that they just want meat, well shoot the does there are plenty of tags. Why the need to shoot that little 6 pt. to only throw his antlers into the corner of the garage.

---

I don’t give a rat’s about trophies. I hunt for meat. I didn’t see a doe this year. That 6 pointer would have fed my family this year.

---

+1 – You can’t eat horns. If you only wanna hunt trophies, then go down to TX on a ranch. There’s still trophies around, these laws are for folks that don’t wanna work at them. As mentioned, it’s a crime that they put these restrictions on MN Hunters yet high sharp shooters to kill everything they see!

Quote:

---

I hunt zone 3 and when I read about this was puzzled as to why they would try this here in the first place. My area is intensive harvest to begin with. I can purchase up to 5 tags and thought the whole point of this was to reduce the size of the herd and I was happy to oblige.

---

You are partly correrct when you say the idea is to reduce the size of the heard, the main idea is to balance the herd.

The following paragrah is from an artical titled Thoughts on Minnesota deer management

In some areas the buck/doe ratio is ridiculously out of balance. The best genetics are passed on when the buck to doe ratio is at a 1-1.5 to 1-2 ratio, meaning 1.5 to 2 does for every buck. In some places around the state, the young bucks have been shot down so hard, for so long, that the buck/doe ratio is as bad as 1-30. If you are hunting for the meat, SHOOT A DOE! That’s how easy it is!

I’d also be fine with a law saying that absolutely no buck deer with more than 3″ of antler visible may be taken prior to the opening day of the primary firearms season. Maybe instead of changes to the existing 4 point rule, that get added. I’ll call this legislator and run that by him.

Why do we have to be the land of 10,000 rules and regulations? We are ruled and regulated to death already.

Quote:

---

I’d also be fine with a law saying that absolutely no buck deer with more than 3″ of antler visible may be taken prior to the opening day of the primary firearms season.

---

Tom I assume from your reply that you belive that this issue is being pushed by bow hunters, is that correct?

Quote:

---

these laws are for folks that don’t wanna work at them.

---

With all due respect that is just simply not true, there has been countles hour of work that has gone into this and it has been in the works for years.

Buck Age Structure
2001 MN DNR Hunter Survey
“A majority (58%) indicated that they would strongly or moderately support protecting small-antlered bucks to increase the odds of shooting large-antlered bucks in later years.”

MN DNR 2005 Hunter Survey
Support for alternative deer regulations
“Overall, respondents were very supportive of a regulation that would put more harvest pressure on antlerless deer and increase the proportion of antlered bucks in local deer populations. In total, 65% of respondents were supportive of these types of regulations”

Shoot the sharp shooter shot all the deer around this area so why get all worked up guys … It will take a good 5 yrs to build them back up

Quote:

---

Tom I assume from your reply that you belive that this issue is being pushed by bow hunters, is that correct?

---

I am all for having things on an even keel, Steve. If bow hunters are the impetus behind the push to get these rules put in place, then they should have to abide by the same sanctions as gun hunters. Gun hunters cannot selectively take a deer prior to their firearms season opener. Why should bow hunters be able to have the advantage of taking a trophy deer that gun hunters the year before had to pass on?

And if so many hunters responded to this querie the dnr posed regarding the taking of does instead of younger bucks…all in the name of bigger and better bucks down the road….why not bring in the earn-a-buck ideology so the trophy hunters can do their part in supporting that idea. Like not being eligible for a buck permit for a year after taking one….require them to register a doe on a primay license the next year before they can apply for a buck permit again. Notice I said “apply”, meaning bucks should be a permit animal statewide.

I think that expecting to kill a trophy every year at someone else’s expense is not right. You want horns, earn them. The big deer are there. People who want nothing but a big deer should have to work for them, not have a deer herd groomed to their liking while others who hunt have to make concessions. If I am expected to make concessions on your behalf, expect me to expect some from you. Again, I am not alone in this thinking. Wear a helmet Steve….you’ll be doing a lot of head banging on this one.

Without making a war of words, I will only state that anyone who is accusing the various “groups” that helped implement this law as being against firearms hunters is dead wrong. The majority of the members in these groups are gun hunters. This is not a bowhunter fight. I agree 100% with popular opinion and every mans right to have their opinion. When political agendas get involved that have nothing to do with what either I or my opponents really want, it gets me fired up.

For those of you that oppose the APR bill and want to repeal it, you should know that it is on the same agenda as state property no gain no loss plan which involves the state being required to sell at least an acre for every acre they buy. Eventually, there will be no state hunting lands. Works for me as long as “groups” like Bluffland and Pheasants Forever are willing to buy up property for the avg Joe but I dont feel that many opponents of the APR will agree with having no state lands.

Steve I will put a helmet on with you
I guess if you can shoot a doe what is the point of shooting a LIL guy Oh so you can pitch the rack in the barn for the mice to eat Whatever ………

I find it quite humorous that the couple proponents of this rule, have yet to make a rebuttal to my comment regarding who is pushing this bill.

the blufflands whitetail association is an organization driven by bowhunters, for BIG RACKS!

You may mask it as “deer management”, but the bottom line is this organization is more concerned with competing with the likes of SW Wisconsin, then they are helping average joe put some venison in his freezer.

Again – i have no problem with the rule change, i wouldn’t mind seeing bigger deer. but, the way it was implemented was not proper. The pushing of one large local outdoor organization should not cover the voice of Joe Public. And it did in this situation.

I’ve hunted Zone 3 for 12 years now, archery and firearm. Wouldn’t I qualify as a viable source of opinion on the subject?

My ballot must have gotten lost in the mail….

with how much of a powderkeg this subject is with Zone 3 hunters, the only fair thing to do, is hold a vote on it, and let the public decide.

Not an outdoor organization that has the ability to sway votes. that is called corrupt politics.

Quote:

---

I am all for having things on an even keel, Steve. If bow hunters are the impetus behind the push to get these rules put in place, then they should have to abide by the same sanctions as gun hunters.

---

The reason I ask is that this is not a bow hunter only issue, webstj beat me to the punch but he is correct that there are more gun hunters in these groups that support APR than bow hunters. Out of the ten board members on BWA only one of them is a hard core bow hunter the rest of them are gun hunters so it is not just the bow hunters that would like to see change.

Quote:

---

And if so many hunters responded to this querie the dnr posed regarding the taking of does instead of younger bucks…all in the name of bigger and better bucks down the road….why not bring in the earn-a-buck ideology so the trophy hunters can do their part in supporting that idea.

---

IMO earn a buck does not work, it did not work in WI so I have no reason to believe it will work here.

Quote:

---

I think that expecting to kill a trophy every year at someone else’s expense is not right. You want horns, earn them. The big deer are there. People who want nothing but a big deer should have to work for them, not have a deer herd groomed to their liking while others who hunt have to make concessions

---

I do not expect to kill a trophy every year, anyone who thinks this will happen after APR has been around for a few years is fooling themselves, you will still have to work for your buck, I have not seen a shooter buck on the hoof (one for the wall) since 2007 but I have seen allot of basket racks. I just would like to see a better balance and give these young bucks a chance to become mature and yes increase my odds of harvesting a mature buck, what is wrong with that?

Quote:

---

Wear a helmet Steve….you’ll be doing a lot of head banging on this one.

---

You may be right about that Tom, I have been told I have a pretty hard head so I may not need the helmet.

All kidding aside thank you for keeping your replies civil I respect that more than you know.

Please show me where you are getting your facts / info from, with all due respect most of your statements are false.

Quote:

---

I find it quite humorous that the couple proponents of this rule, have yet to make a rebuttal to my comment regarding who is pushing this bill.

the blufflands whitetail association is an organization driven by bowhunters, for BIG RACKS!

---

This is simply not true like I have said many times before out of the 10 most active members in BWA (the 10 board members) only one of them is a hard core bow hunter the rest are gun hunters.

Quote:

---

You may mask it as “deer management”, but the bottom line is this organization is more concerned with competing with the likes of SW Wisconsin, then they are helping average joe put some venison in his freezer.

---

Jack Peck a board member of BWA was the guy who got the ball rolling on the venison donation program in MN to help put food on the table for families in need. BWA also pushed for the youth hunt in MN. You should come to a meeting sometime you might be surprised at all the topics that are talked about that have nothing to do with BIG RACKS.

Quote:

---

Again – i have no problem with the rule change, i wouldn’t mind seeing bigger deer. but, the way it was implemented was not proper. The pushing of one large local outdoor organization should not cover the voice of Joe Public. And it did in this situation.

---

BWA is not that big of a group and could not have made the change to APR & no cross tagging of bucks by themselves. Anyone can come to the public input meetings, anyone can vote on the public polls and yes your ballot was counted if you sent one in.

Quote:

---

I’ve hunted Zone 3 for 12 years now, archery and firearm. Wouldn’t I qualify as a viable source of opinion on the subject?

---

Yes you would, how many of the public meetings have you been to?

Quote:

---

Steve I will put a helmet on with you

---

Thanks Jason I appreciate that, but just like me I do not think you are going to need a helmet either.