Let antler-point experiment play out

CLICK HERE

I think Atherton’s comparison of the average hunter to peta people is a really wrong thing to do and shows a great deal of immaturity. The meeting to which he refers was held to determine whether this rule should be over-turned. Let the elected officials do what they do. You want more big deer, close the buck hunting before and after the regular deer season dates. Then we’ll all be on even ground.

The only way to eliminate cross-tagging, by the way, is to eliminate party hunting….good luck on that. So you know, I hunt by myself. Doesn’t mean squat to me.

X1 CT

Thanks Tom.

Overstepping the dnr is not what elected officials are there to do. How about we let the dnr do what they are suppose to do.

Atherton didn’t compare regular hunters to peta. He compared the mdha verbage to verbage peta uses, and he is spot on. It sounds exactly like the garbage peta would put out there.

Maybe consider that the dnr here stepped way ove what they are supposed to do. If this rule is such an ideal, why is there so much controversy? With all this gimme, gimme, gimme garbage by a few people that affects hundreds, what concessions are the few willing to make? The legislature is here to protect the interests of all of us hunters, the dnr in this case has chosen to negatively impact hundreds at the whim of a small group. If this rule is such an outstanding piece, put it to work in a small area….like Winona County, for three years and then poll every one who hunts there according to licenses purchased in that area and for that area.

Once blind always blind I guess, eh?

And the MDHA is made up of regular everyday deer hunters, so yes, that comparison to peta was made.

Quote:

---

Maybe consider that the dnr here stepped way ove what they are supposed to do. If this rule is such an ideal, why is there so much controversy? With all this gimme, gimme, gimme garbage by a few people that affects hundreds, what concessions are the few willing to make? The legislature is here to protect the interests of all of us hunters, the dnr in this case has chosen to negatively impact hundreds at the whim of a small group. If this rule is such an outstanding piece, put it to work in a small area….like Winona County, for three years and then poll every one who hunts there according to licenses purchased in that area and for that area.

Once blind always blind I guess, eh?

And the MDHA is made up of regular everyday deer hunters, so yes, that comparison to peta was made.

---

Well said.

Tom maybe you should get a few facts straight. Mainly that the majority of hunters polled were for protection of young bucks. So let’s quit pretending that some small vocal minority pushed this through. Because that is not a fact!.

As a hunter, read the verbage put out there by the mdha. When I first read it I thought it was something written by peta. How can you not distinguish that he is referring to the verbage written by them as being “peta-like”? That does not look like something written by a deer hunting club. I get a kick out of how some people think some little club git this done. The numbers aren’t secret, go look them up.

Both sides of this are made up of everyday hunters.

The whole of this four point rule is on shakey ground. I’ll give you two instances.

1. This plan allows for youth to shoot whatever they want to during special hunts. If the DNR had any smarts at all, they would say that any UNANTLERED animal can be taken so that a step in the direction of POSITIVE herd balance is made. BUT, by allowing youth to take whatever and then restricting legal license holders [adults] to taking of only certain deer should they want a buck is nothing more than the purest form of age discrimination. This can be challenged legally by the way and might be if this rule continues.

2. In their infinite wisdom, the dnr forgot to establish a uniform process of determining antler length. Where exactly does one measure from to obtain the needed one inch to be legal? If it is from the centerline of a beam or tine it grows from, say so. If it to be measured from the top surface of the beam or time, say so. This “leave to the discretion of the CO” is pure bull….they have to have a benchmark to follow.

3. If the DNR isn’t going to ticket bear hunters for shooting collared bears [which I agree whole heartedly with] because hunters might not be able to see that bright orange collar while the bear is in the woods or is running, just how in the hell is a deer hunter supposed to see a one inch tine on an animal running 30 miles per hour thru the woods?

This rule deliberately attacks a broad range of hunters in just one zone. If this rule is so good, make it apply state-wide and see how well it is adapted to. But what makes this rule insidious, is that it takes away the rights of law abiding deer hunters just to answer a whim of a few who think they should be able to shoot a trophy deer every year. If you want big deer, go hunt the darned things. You want all horns every year? Go to a game farm, they have plenty. This rule negatively biases a specific group of people way larger than those who think it will benefit them.

I had to pass on some nice 6 pointers last fall. Am I pissed about it? YES. My thinking is simple here. If a certain group of whiners can get this lame branch of the dnr to convince a legislative body to pass this law, then something should have to be given up to make this law truely on equal ground. No BUCKS should be able to be taken prior to or after the regular deer season. Period. All does….to help balance the deer herd you know. Its the right thing to do. That’s what I am being told. And if its good for me after I spend my money on a license that is bound to go up in cost, it darned well better be good for you as a horn hunter. And then to be certain that you, as a horn hunter, does his fair share in balancing the deer herd [which apparently is so out of wack that the dnr can issue a slaughter order for an area 75 miles from this illustrious big buck only zone where bazzillions of does are a plague]by not being eligible for another drawing year of bucks only hunting. Yes…make the taking of bucks a lottery affair. That should get some size to them.

By the way, that cwd fiasco was about herd reduction, not cwd and think of all the huge bucks that fell to those guns and you are not sniveling about it. Just think about it.

I have to agree with the title of this thread. This is nothing more than an experiment. The DNR is conducting an experiment on a hunting area that already has a healthy deer population with a good balance between bucks, does, young and mature. These proponents of APR make it sound like all everyone ever did was shoot young bucks. The fact is that before this unnecessary experiment, hunters were taking bucks of all sizes and that is what keeps the balance. If you want to shoot only big bucks, then go for it. Just because that is your style, doesn’t mean the rest of us should have to hunt that way. I am glad we have some politicians that have to common sense to keep the DNR in check. The DNR should be managing the deer herd as a whole, not micro-managing it to cater to the desires of the few.

Get your facts straight tom. Like it or not you are in the minority in zone 3. Go look at the numbers and quit assuming. The majority of zone 3 hunters are for some form of protection for young bucks.

I don’t get this misconception that the people that are for protection of young bucks are some small minority??? The numbers are public knowledge. The dnr has wanted to do this for a while and the tipping point was when the numbers showed the majority were for change. So Draskowski has stepped on the toes of the dnr AND the majority of hunters in zone 3.

Steve good thread, but why are you posting it on fishing general instead of hunting (Deer) ???

I am pointing out inequities of this rule as a whole, after the fact. Don’t care for it, tough. They exist.

Driftwood makes some seriously good points in his post as well.

The lawmakers that brought this to issue recently are doing their jobs, not stepping on toes. Concerned individuals brought these issues to their attention and they are addressing them. Its too bad if you are upset that its happening…now maybe you can see how others might have been upset with this rule to start with. Stop whining.

I wonder, James, if your fishing ethic is as strong as your hunting ethic? You apparently feel that you should be able to hit the field and blast a trophy every year….do you hit the water and expect to pop a trophy walleye every time you go? If this is how you work, I feel sorry for you that there isn’t more to either venture.

Like I said James, I am pointing out seriously flawed areas in this rule, some that make it a terribly lopsided rule. I am a huge supporter of equality and if this rule wants to hold together it needs to show that equality. It doesn’t. And until it is re-worked to balance the needs of ALL hunter groups, it should be scrapped.

I do not see the deer herd needing any balancing by any human intervention. Especially not in this area. If hunters are having a tough time getting big deer in front of them due to ever-increasing hunting land leases or other lose of private land, then maybe the attack should focus on those who are getting the money for such lands. Are they paying taxes on this money? Maybe get a hold of your representatives and ask them to put together a bill that takes all tax loopholes and subsidies from farmers who don’t allow public hunting. Maybe you just have to focus more on being a more prudent hunter. There are options just listed that do not impose on me as a deer hunter. The 4 point rule does. I am only pointing out things that make it unfair and pointing out others that would ,make it fair. You obviously want your cake and eat it too. So join the club, dude.

You indicate that the true minority here are those who do not want this rule. Well then, I’ll speak for myself as well as that faction. We know that it is an uphill battle, but the lawmakers have taken notice of this and maybe that will not bide well for a dnr’s big game division that seems of late to not make real solid decisions. I have my sources for information, you have yours. We’ll just have to agree to disagree here. The bottom line here is that Atherton’s article was little more than a published whine session in a local newspaper. His reference to the general deer hunting community and MDHA as being similar to pita makes him look like like a little child having a tamtrum and using name calling because his bedtime is being re-assessed. The peper space would have been better used to support the trout day thing in Forestville in a week or so.

Quote:

---

Steve good thread, but why are you posting it on fishing general instead of hunting (Deer) ???

---

X2

The best way to get a clear idea of Hunters thoughts on this issue is to have the Question asked to each hunter when buying a deer hunting license. That way we get a true reflection of what ALL deer hunters think. This is something that should be decided by the majority of ALL deer hunters

You can make me out to be an antler hungry person all you want Tom, but priority #1 is meat in the freezer and that is never a problem.

I feel sorry for you sir that having to let a 6 pointer walked ruined your da. Who is it again that doesn’t know the real meaning of the hunt?

I don’t have a problem with your opinion.my problem is with using blatantly false information to backup your opinion .

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Steve good thread, but why are you posting it on fishing general instead of hunting (Deer) ???

---

X2

---

If you guys look at the link in my fist post it does take you to the hunting side, for what ever reasons I do not know why it seems to get more replies over here. The reason I posted the link to the hunting side was to get the replies over there.

Quote:

---

The best way to get a clear idea of Hunters thoughts on this issue is to have the Question asked to each hunter when buying a deer hunting license. That way we get a true reflection of what ALL deer hunters think. This is something that should be decided by the majority of ALL deer hunters

---

I would go along with that as long as you are talking about zone 3 hunter only, remember this rule is for zone 3 only so it should be zone 3 hunters who vote not the rest of the state and 70% of zone 3 hunters polled said they want to protect young bucks.

To each his own James. If your only concerned with meat in the freezer you can get it without cost by leaving your name with the county sheriff’s dispatcher and/or the hiway patrol. If its only meat your are bent on, then you can excuse yourself from this discussion….its not about meat. Sorry you didn’t, or could not, gather this.

The party with the suggestion of polling at license purchase time is dead on…state-wide dead on.

And now James, if a rule was passed that said you had to take a doe for two years prior to registering a buck, how would you like that? Such a rule would take away any decision making you currently have before you pull the trigger and is no different than what we have forced on today takes away my ability to decide what suits me to shoot.

I can’t imagine what the tirade would be like from your camp if this shoe was on the other foot.

Quote:

---

Get your facts straight tom. Like it or not you are in the minority in zone 3. Go look at the numbers and quit assuming. The majority of zone 3 hunters are for some form of protection for young bucks.

---

Using what data – A small sampleing – If the really want a vaid response they should pose the ? to all hunters who are purchaseing a deer hunting license. The data that you are referencing is a really small portion of not only zone 3 hunters but a extreamly small portion of all hunters

Quote:

---

I had to pass on some nice 6 pointers last fall. Am I pissed about it? YES.

---

“• To those who said last year was the worst year of hunting they’ve ever had, I say that this year might be their best, with more 10- and 12-point bucks in southeastern Minnesota than at any time in the past 50 years — and 2012 could be absolutely eye-popping.”

Last year I saw 9 different bucks in two days of hunting and never even thought about raising the gun…..can’t wait for the next two years!

Hey Jake….how’s the river down your way? Taming down a little maybe?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The best way to get a clear idea of Hunters thoughts on this issue is to have the Question asked to each hunter when buying a deer hunting license. That way we get a true reflection of what ALL deer hunters think. This is something that should be decided by the majority of ALL deer hunters

---

I would go along with that as long as you are talking about zone 3 hunter only, remember this rule is for zone 3 only so it should be zone 3 hunters who vote not the rest of the state and 70% of zone 3 hunters polled said they want to protect young bucks.

---

Steve

You and I both know that that poll was answered by only a rather small portion of zone 3 hunters and I think you will agree that all hunter in zone 3 should have a say on the matter. likewise if they want to expand it to other zones those hunters should also have a say so. i don’t know how those in favor of APR can say it’s being used as a herd management tool. There are far better herd management tool for them to use. Lets call this what it – A BIG RACK management tool!!!!

Quote:

---

Steve

You and I both know that that poll was answered by only a rather small portion of zone 3 hunters and I think you will agree that all hunter in zone 3 should have a say on the matter.

---

With all due respect that statement is wrong not only was this a sample survey sent out to zone 3 hunters it was also posted on the DNR website where anyone could have taken the survey, I also posted those links here on IDO.

Quote:

---

likewise if they want to expand it to other zones those hunters should also have a say so.

---

No one in the DNR or Blufflands or any other group that I know of is talking about expanding APR to other zones. MPO is that APR would not work up north, they simply do not have the habitat that zone 3 has.

Quote:

---

The party with the suggestion of polling at license purchase time is dead on…state-wide dead on.

---

Again this is not a state wide issue it is a zone 3 issue, why should someone who does not hunt in zone 3 have a say?

I would assume that the VAST majority of deer hunters do want to protect young bucks.

I’m good with that.

The problem with this law is in areas of where there isn’t any doe permits, or lottery draw of permits, where a hunter can only shoot a mature buck, when the option of shooting a doe is not there.

People are pissed that they can’t shoot a deer for the meat. They can’t shoot a doe, and the buck has to be an 8-pt.
Then, they don’t see an 8pt, so then what? They go home empty handed.

Let the youth enjoy the “hunt” of shooting anything.
Let the old enjoy the last years of their hunting by shooting anything.
Yes, don’t shoot the little spikes and fork-horns.

But also, don’t handicap the hunter who wants to “HUNT”!!!!!

My question for the APR advocates is this:
When the woods are fully full of 120-150 class bucks because of this law, and they are a dime-a-dozen, does that mean they are not trophies anymore?

I’ve hunted Texas, where I pulled a 150 class buck. I was very happy with it…..Until I took it to the taxidermist and saw all the 160-190 class animals. My 150 class buck was nothing more than a typical “8-pt” basket rack you see common around here.
It meant nothing….It wasn’t a trophy…..a 9pt, with 20″ spread and 10″ tines was “nothing” in the eyes of a Texas deer hunter.
Catching a 5lb walleye is a “trophy” in the average fisherman’s eyes. Catching a 5lb walleye on Pool 4 in March/April doesn’t even give you a “nod” of appreciation.

Where does it end?
I’ve seen/experienced/hunted this first hand.
This APR doesn’t do/mean jack….
Our area in Zone 3 is flooded with 8-pt “basket-racked” animals. They are legal, but they mean nothing and they are not protected.

This law is nothing more than antler greed.
Nothing more, nothing less.
So advocates need to quit hiding behind the skirt.
Greed is forcing this into law where every advocate wants a nice set of antlers for the garage.
Because the garage is the only place they will be in a couple of years, because they are just average bucks that don’t mean jack.

Have fun with it!

I’ve often think about the same things Gary. Good post.

Quote:

---

People are pissed that they can’t shoot a deer for the meat. They can’t shoot a doe, and the buck has to be an 8-pt.
Then, they don’t see an 8pt, so then what? They go home empty handed.

---

Hi Gary!

My lunch is almost over and I had to skim quickly thru your reply I will reread it when I get home from work today. I did however want to correct just one of your points, the deer does not have to be an 8 point to be a legal deer it just needs 4 points on one side so if the other side had one two or three points it would be a legal deer.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

People are pissed that they can’t shoot a deer for the meat. They can’t shoot a doe, and the buck has to be an 8-pt.
Then, they don’t see an 8pt, so then what? They go home empty handed.

---

Hi Gary!

My lunch is almost over and I had to skim quickly thru your reply I will reread it when I get home from work today. I did however want to correct just one of your points, the deer does not have to be an 8 point to be a legal deer it just needs 4 points on one side so if the other side had one two or three points it would be a legal deer.

---

I hear ya Steve, the “intent” is 8pt or 4 pts on one side.
More/Less same difference.

What bugs me worse is this…….
I’m willing to toss down a $100 on a bet.
The bet is this….
That 90% of the APR advocates that are bow-gun-muzzleloader” hunters.
I’m betting that 90% of those in that catagory, that are so heavy on this APR are CROSS-TAGGING DEER.
THEY ARE SHOOTING DEER ON THEIR GF, WIFE, BROTHER, SISTER DEER TAGS, SO THEY CAN JUST KEEP SHOOTING DEER!

If you want facts, then let’s dig into facts.
How many Zone 3 deer hunters are tagging more than 1 buck a year and using the “brother-in-law” tag to do it!

Yea, I’m willing to bet this response goes pretty quiet around here…..