Not everyone is going to like what the DNR does, right now, its obvious that some think the DNR is doing a lousy job. I don't think they have a clue (the people, not the DNR). Our herd is doing very well. I just think that in some places where the herd is well populated and its not uncommon to see at least one deer in range when you go out, that we can do more to help some more bucks reach maturity. I think changing the season dates would be drastic, and logistically difficult in zone 3. I'd like to hear some options though. I think that antler restrictions could be beneficial, but I don't like the DNR telling me what to shoot, however, I don't mind making some hunters get a good look at what they are shooting first. When someone sees a mature buck, it doesn't matter if its going full tilt through brush, you will know when its a "shooter" buck. They have the large things on their head, usually look white in the woods. As for party hunting, I don't have a problem with it, you want to to use your buddies tag for a doe, go ahead, but I think you should only be allowed one antlered deer a year, once you have shot and registered and antlered deer, you should not be able to legally party hunt for another. Give the bucks a chance, put someone else in your stand, let them have a go if you think there are more out there. We already hunt the rut, why do some individuals need to shoot 2 or even 3 bucks a year????? Its too bad that it would be so tough to enforce, I don't have any idea how they could do except to say that once you shoot a mature buck, you would be done for that season and have to wait until the next opens up to hunt again for does, wouldn't be too bad, but I'm sure that some will really think that is a horrible idea. I don't care if you do go to your hunting shack for a week and tag out on opening morning. I'd be darn happy to hunt for 2 hours and shoot a monster. I'm sure that I'd spend the rest of the week squirrel hunting or day dreaming about the hunt that was.

Managing for deer shouldn't be about maximizing the number of animals. It should be for trying to keep a steady constant number of healthy animals that does not exceed the area's carrying capacity.

I'm curious, what sort of programs have the DNR done to boost/enhance the deer herd. Or better yet what could they do? I see some logging (which aids deer greatly for a few years), and purchasing a some land tracts. Note this doesn't do anything new for for the deer, but does give access to hunters. I believe private land owners have the oppportunity to do WAY more than the DNR can.

Like I said, what you would give up would be 1-2 years of not being able to shoot a small buck. That's it. By year 3 you would have a many bucks that be mature/legal to harvest. You wouldn't have to travel to Kansas/Iowa to have a legit chance a mature buck AND plenty of other opportunities for meat.

I don't think comparing MN to KS/IA is a good comparison. First they are vastly different in land types/terrain and I beleive KS/IA are heavily privatized and restrict Non-Res hunters.

One thing that I am heavily in favor is, is a call-in registration. It would save a ton of money and be much quicker. You punch in your dnr #, a few questions and boom, your'e done. Give people 3 days to do it. You'd still have a tag to put on the animal. If you're up at deer camp, you can go to town and call in.

[/quote] I would hate to think that hunters from MI and WI are a tougher breed of men and women to be able to handle the weather. [/quote]

Oh now them theres fightin words!!!!

Hey Guru,read your comment about the earn a buck program.Here in Wis its been going on for about 5 years in different areas,YOU DO NOT WANT THIS IN MINN.Our deer pop. has taken a drastic decline since our dnr has started it.I dont care if you are a meat hunter or trophy hunter,BROWN ITS DOWN.Here in Wis our dnr has got the deer pop. est.so screwed up no one is seeing deer.Take a look at the Wis DNR website and look at the kill numbers from this year,they are down 23% statewide.

GSWATTER, thank you. I have a brother that lives in Menomonie. Has a 40 acre farm, hates the EAB. Said people pick up road kill and do all sorts of nasty stuff to get their EAB tag. They let their population get way out wack over there. Yeah, they have big deer, but they also have a population problem.

I will let the 2007 buck harvest data speak for itself. Look at links to these maps. MN has far fewer bucks per square mile. In fact, our highest zone only goes to 2.7-4.3.
mn deer buck harvest 2007 per square mile

Now look at WI?
WI 2007 buck harvest per square mile


Theirs goes up to 4.3 -7.4 with multiple zones that are 2.0 - 3.0 and 3.1 to 4.2

I know, stats are just that stats. But they don't lie.

there is a lot more interesting data on both sites too. I would have posted them, but who wants to read a book

well there's gonna be loop holes in any law...just like the party hunting...people are morons if they pick up roadkill to use as their EAB lol...your not even a hunter if you do stuff like that...them are the same kind of people that bend or break any law...why don't they just go register a fake deer? the register stations i go to don't even come out to look at your deer.

the harvest #'s might be down where there is EAB but i wonder if the doe harvest #'s are up? which would be a good thing if the buck to doe ratio is lopsided. i wonder if alot hunters just get their doe then kinda give up on their buck since they already got some venny? are the actually #'s of hunters up or down in the EAB areas? it sure would suck to have a huge buck in front of ya and you couldn't shoot it because you haven't got a doe yet though lol.

if your a kid or a new hunter you'd be happy with anything...a deer is a deer right? i know my first deer i ever shot was a doe with a bow and i was stoked.

i know EAB would make me shoot a doe on the first day so i could get that out of my way and now hunt for my buck...almost all mature buck hunters would then take a doe asap..which would help even out the buck to doe ratio.

another thing about a more even ratio is the bucks actually have to go out and search for available doe's...the more they'd have to search the more we'd see...most bucks around here don't have to go any further then over the next ridge to find a family of doe's....if people had chances to see more bucks then they'd be more willing to pass on smaller bucks.

calling, rattling, decoying, ect, would all work way better and would make that type of hunting way more fun for people...i love the agressive tactics the way it is but it could be much better.

i'm not really for or against law changes or restrictions i just know things could be better and if there's changes that could make things better i'd be willing to do what it takes.

in the meantime all people can do is express their opinions and shoot around ideas and concerns...i think everyone see's where everyone else is coming from on either side.

What are you trying to say Swill? Those numbers mean nothing by themselves. All they say is more bucks were shot in Wisconsin. They say nothing about the size or age of the deer. I could interpret them as saying Minnesota hunters are shooting fewer bucks and therefore passing on smaller ones.

According to Wisconsin's DNR site they only use earn a buck in deer management units if it has had at least two years of consecutive herd control or earn a buck seasons, which failed to reduce the population to near goal and if another non-EAB season is not likely to do so.

Earn a buck isn't used there as a way to get bigger bucks, which is the topic of this thread.

Black Bay, you are correct on EAB. But the spin off effect is that some people are less likely to pull the trigger once they get a deer in the freezer.

The big key IF (or assumption) on those types of season structures is to have an accurate population estimate. Which is extremely tough to do across an entire management unit. For instance two seasons ago there were lots of antlerless deer in the zone we hunt in WI, but you had to buy a normal deer tag. Last year it was herd control, which it should have been. As it should have been the year before when it was a regular unit. This year it was herd control again, when there is NO way it should have been. I've got no idea what sort of count they used, but they should scrap it. Next year if they "count" is high it could go to EAB, but from my experiences it should go back to a normal unit with limited antlerless tags available.

True, nothing on size or age; but they still are killing more bucks then MN hunters. And passing on smaller ones in MN? In the brown it is down capital on the midwest? Ummm sure that is what is happening.

not sure where you hunt nolte, but here was last years estimated fall population. From the WI DNR web site, they record population levels 3 times a year.


map

http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/hunt/deer/fall_abund.htm

First off, you are right Michigan and Wisconsin have more hunters than we do, but in Michigan roughly 6.7% of the population hunts. In Minnesota the number is 9.6%. Michigan has about twice as many people so you can't just compare the number of licenses sold. However, both states lag far behind Wisconsin which is about 15% of the population buying licenses.

As far as the "worthless ground" argument. You must have little experience in farm country. Areas that contain a high percentage of crop land and a low percentage of timber/set aside areas have a very hard time holding deer after the crops are gone and like you mentioned once pressure is applied it gets worse.

what is the purpose of EAB?

Maybe baiting has a lot to do with better success rates.MN it's not legal.But I think Michigan,Wisconsin,Canada, you can bait.I'm also saw a show this past weekend with feeders on it saying they where hunting Kansas.Can you bait in Kansas?Just putting something else out there.I would not bait but if legal who knows.I know you have to worry about diasease and other things but maybe bringing in more deer(does) to bait piles helps with the more bucks harvested.