# Why is Trophy Management a Bad Thing?



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

blood trail said:


> Which One?:lol::lol:


I reckon both.:lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

standsetter said:


> Trophy Management addresses many of the same priorities and goals our current regulations strive to achieve regarding population control, limiting car deer collisions, crop damage etc.
> 
> A case could be made (by you, if so inclined ) how any perceived negative consequences were social in nature and therefore inconsequential so long as hunter opportunity exists and herd sustainability is assured.


I would disagree, trophy management programs tend to be property specific and only take into account any external factors that directly impact the herd residing on that particular property. 

I doubt many trophy managers are adjusting their resident density out of concerns about crop damage on a neighboring property or to limit the number of potential car deer accidents. They are focusing on the maximum production of trophy antlered bucks. That is why they are particularily unsuited as the basis for public policy that has many competing goals.


----------



## Joedirt (Dec 3, 2010)

bioactive said:


> Hmmm...if I shoot a 1.5 year old or let him pass (assuming he survives the season), I get the same result, he is removed from the 1.5 year old class.
> 
> In the former case he is dead, in the latter he becomes a 2.5 year old. Either way, he is removed from the 1.5 year old class.
> 
> ...


Using your thinking here... why shoot the fawns they will be removed from that class next year and be in the 1.5 year old class .


----------



## brookie1 (Jan 26, 2011)

bioactive said:


> Hmmm...if I shoot a 1.5 year old or let him pass (assuming he survives the season), I get the same result, he is removed from the 1.5 year old class.
> 
> In the former case he is dead, in the latter he becomes a 2.5 year old. Either way, he is removed from the 1.5 year old class.
> 
> ...


Ah ha, shooting them before they are born, very sneaky. So how do you regulate older age classes of bucks? Oh that's right, you shoot them too, just not the 1.5s. So basically under QDM you shoot everything that isn't shot under TDM. This doesn't sound good. We won't have anything left.


----------



## da Appleknocker (Jan 26, 2009)

Brookie, thats Jehovah with a capital "J".


----------



## ridgewalker (Jun 24, 2008)

hunting man said:


> Most know they will not get the big mature bucks. Not that they dont want to but they just know its not going to happen often. They call them their "once in a lifetime" big buck. So they head out and willingly take whatever buck they can. They are thrilled to take a spike or fork horn. They might not even see a racked deer of any size but every 3 or 4 years. So when they do see and are able to take a racked deer they are satisfied. Heck there are some that the taking of a doe is good enough. They do look up to the year in and year out buck killers. However they will never have the drive to put in enough effort to become that hunter. And they are happy with how they hunt.
> 
> The big buck hunters dont understand this. They feel everyone should be just like they are and put in the countless hours it takes to get a big buck. Thats never going to happen.





mkriep2006 said:


> I consider myself a hardcore hunter, with responsibilities. I think about hunting year round, i'm preparing for hunting year round and i hunt every second that i can.
> 
> *Q*uality *D*eer *M*anagement, would incinuate management of *ALL* deer not just for bigger bucks after all its not called "quality rack management". Quality is in the eye of the beholder, to me quality means a nice healthy deer, i have no problem with anyone who chooses to wait for the Trophy nor anyone who just wants meat in the freezer.
> 
> Quality deer hunting is the entire experience of a hunting lifestyle, the history, the comrodery, the family, the stories, being in the great outdoors, and HARVESTING DEER. To me a monster buck is nothing more than a bonus to the entire experience





Munsterlndr said:


> "When is trophy management a bad thing?"
> 
> When it serves as the underlying basis for public policy and regulatory change.





hunting man said:


> Most of them dont kill bucks at all, for many years. They just dont see bucks to kill period. Some may see a buck once every 3 or 4 years wether its a spike or 8 point. That doesnt mean they are able to kill it when they do see one either. This kind of casual hunter gets their thrills by just being there in deer camp with the gang, once a year. The preparation and blind tending, scouting, story telling and the whole experience of being at a traditional northern Michigan deer camp. For the hardcore deer killers this is hard for them to ever understand. Some can do it and some never will.


Trophy management can become a bad thing because of all the above which are superbly crafted posts. If a land owner or leasee chooses to practice a certain management style (within the legal limits) that is their business and should be noone else's. However when it becomes a mandate ,as Munster states, then it has gone beyond a reasonable expectation or standard.


----------



## bioactive (Oct 30, 2005)

brookie1 said:


> You know better than that.:lol: *Anyway, according to the QDM website they protect all 1.5 year old bucks, *just as nature intended I guess. It kind of goes against one of the tenets, but whatever. Protecting an entire age class of young bucks, what does that sound like? It's like religion, if believing it gets you through life, go for it. Just don't force it on anyone else. Gotta go, damn jehovah's witnesses at the door.....


Actually the bolded part of your statement is untrue. QDMA encourages "restraint" in the harvest of young bucks. Without question, there will always continue to be young bucks harvested in any reasonable QDM program. The problem is, that there is little restraint in the harvest of young bucks in our state. It is not "as nature intended" to have only 2% of male deer reach adulthood, and it is not "as nature intended" to have 60-70% of the male deer harvest be 1.5 year olds. QDM tries to work in the direction that nature intends, which is to have some bucks live to be adults. The stated goal is to have the buck age class structure reflect that of the doe age class. 

If "protecting an entire age class of bucks" seems like a religion, does the wholesale slaughter of one age class of bucks seem like a religion too (that is what is going on today)?

The number one problem we have in this state is antler fanaticism. Hunters for the most part are so antler crazed that they specifically target deer with antlers almost to an obsessive degree. QDM, in my opinion, is the cure for antler worship.


----------



## November Sunrise (Jan 12, 2006)

brookie1 said:


> You know better than that.:lol: Anyway, according to the QDM website they protect all 1.5 year old bucks, just as nature intended I guess. It kind of goes against one of the tenets, but whatever. QUOTE]
> 
> LOL.
> 
> ...


----------



## NovemberWhitetailz (Oct 10, 2008)

Perfect, Bio!


----------



## November Sunrise (Jan 12, 2006)

bioactive said:


> If "protecting an entire age class of bucks" seems like a religion, does the wholesale slaughter of one age class of bucks seem like a religion too (that is what is going on today)?
> 
> .


That, Mr. Brauker, is good. That's very good. 

Someone in a thread recently was speaking about bumper stickers. How about this for a bumper sticker: "Why dost thou continue to worship at the yearling buck altar?"


----------



## ridgewalker (Jun 24, 2008)

bioactive said:


> The number one problem we have in this state is antler fanaticism. Hunters for the most part are so antler crazed that they specifically target deer with antlers almost to an obsessive degree. QDM, in my opinion, is the cure for antler worship.


I will assume that is an accurate statement. That I agree with wholeheartedly. Our camp has no problem in harvesting a reasonable number of does each year. The above statement is why I feel that trophy management can become a problem. It is also why I am against ARs. IMO those regulations cause hunters to focus on antlers alone and not on the general herd health. I believe that education is the best approach to developing some restraint in limiting the number of young bucks taken each year.


----------



## brookie1 (Jan 26, 2011)

bioactive said:


> The number one problem we have in this state is antler fanaticism. Hunters for the most part are so antler crazed that they specifically target deer with antlers almost to an obsessive degree. QDM, in my opinion, is the cure for antler worship.


UM, ok, lol.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bioactive said:


> The number one problem we have in this state is antler fanaticism. Hunters for the most part are so antler crazed that they specifically target deer with antlers almost to an obsessive degree. QDM, in my opinion, is the cure for antler worship.


In this state? Try in the SLP. Not much problem with antler fanaticism in the rest of the state, we harvest plenty of does and maintain our populations accordingly. Hunters in the NLP and UP tend to be deer hunters, willing to harvest pretty much any deer. Hunters in the SLP tend to be buck hunters, with a curious fixation on those hard male appendages sported by bucks. Some antlerphiles feel that big is better....... for some size is not an issue but in any case, it's more of a regional affliction then a statewide problem.


----------



## triplelunger (Dec 21, 2009)

you've got some great insights, brookie. You have made me think about some things a bit different.


----------



## Manthus (Jul 5, 2010)

HUBBHUNTER2 said:


> Perfect, Bio!


 
Exactly, Michigan is so far behind other states because people within our State do not understand that passing smaller bucks creates larger bucks. Nobody has ENOUGH restraint because they don't believe they will see anything bigger than what they just saw. It's like a mix between a self-fulfilling prophecy, a double edged sword, and an equation based on a full circle.


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

Michigan hunters with an Antlter fixation??? Those who think that haven't visited any "big buck states" such as Iowa, illinois, or ohio would be humbled upon talking with those locals. Michigan has a buck killing tradition, which is out dated in my opinion.

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## TwodogsNate (Jul 30, 2009)

Munsterlndr said:


> In this state? Try in the SLP. Not much problem with antler fanaticism in the rest of the state, we harvest plenty of does and maintain our populations accordingly.


 

Your logic is flawed. Its pretty easy to manage a population when there isn't much of a population to manage. It has nothing to do with antler fanaticism. Using your logic, Hunters that like hunting for Trophy bucks most have some type of "Magic switch" That gets turned off when they cross the Zilwaukee?


----------



## standsetter (Dec 2, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> I would disagree, trophy management programs tend to be property specific and only take into account any external factors that directly impact the herd residing on that particular property.
> 
> I doubt many trophy managers are adjusting their resident density out of concerns about crop damage on a neighboring property or to limit the number of potential car deer accidents. They are focusing on the maximum production of trophy antlered bucks. That is why they are particularily unsuited as the basis for public policy that has many competing goals.


Trophy management strives to maintain herd densities well below carrying capacity. Any benefits regarding crop damage, car crashes etc. are residual, but measurable just the same.

Your argument seems to be based on what "many" do or don't do, instead of what established guidelines for proper implementation would dictate.

It's an out for you I suppose, but not a good one IMO. What's the old saying...Teach a strawman to fish and he eats red herring forever, or something like that.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

TwodogsNate said:


> Your logic is flawed. Its pretty easy to manage a population when there isn't much of a population to manage. It has nothing to do with antler fanaticism. Using your logic, Hunters that like hunting for Trophy bucks most have some type of "Magic switch" That gets turned off when they cross the Zilwaukee?


No population to manage? :lol:

How about no "gross overpopulation" to manage. 

And part of that is because NLP & UP hunters kill enough does to lower populations to reasonable levels, unlike their SLP brethren.

If there is not difference in hunter attitudes, maybe you can explain why UP & NLP hunters do a much better job of protecting yearling bucks then SLP hunters do? To what do you ascribe the fact that as a percentage of the antlered buck harvest, yearling's are below 50% of the total antlered buck harvest in the NLP & UP and way above 50% in the SLP? Maybe part of that is a willingness on the part of NLP & UP hunters to harvest an antlerless deer instead.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

standsetter said:


> Trophy management strives to maintain herd densities well below carrying capacity. Any benefits regarding crop damage, car crashes etc. are residual, but measurable just the same.
> 
> Your argument seems to be based on what "many" do or don't do, instead of what established guidelines for proper implementation would dictate.
> 
> It's an out for you I suppose, but not a good one IMO. What's the old saying...Teach a strawman to fish and he eats red herring forever, or something like that.


Ok, if you want to argue that trophy management is a viable form of management for widespread applications including public land, so be it. 

I'll simply agree to disagree and re-iterate that it's a management program that generally focuses on a single goal, without taking into account a wide range of ancillary implications that are not specific to achieving that desired goal and is poorly suited as a comprehensive statewide management philosophy. 

By the way, the snide little attacks that you incorporate when responding to my posts are getting a little stale, surely you can come up with some better ones? :lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Don Walters Jr said:


> LOL! Thank you for the grammar correction. My "smart" phone likes to make assumptions for me at times. But, I know what your saying, or is it you're? I can never remember that! Then their or there I mean, is that hole, I mean whole "i" before "e" except after "c" thing......I just don't get it.
> 
> _DWJ_


No problem, just jerking your chain. 

I'm lousy with grammar myself, always used to get your and you're wrong until L&O schooled me on that one, just couldn't resist the irony, given the statement that the error was made in.


----------



## muliefever (Jul 2, 2007)

wintrrun said:


> Mulie in all due respect i find this post to be one of the many poster childs for why the avg joe does not embrace anything to do with deer management.
> The statistics are a fallacy and your personal opinions are condescending to say the least.
> Most of the NLP stateland does suck for hunting , but one needs to go no further than to look at a land or areas "carrying capacities" to understand why. Stateland in the NLP is a good environment for deer, its not a great one. Although the deer killers play a part, Ma Nature always has the final say.
> I see a decent amount of age structure on stateland in Benzie County all summer long. Come fall it tends to shift to private land for all the obvious reasons( poor habitat, poor hunting practices, overcrowding,etc...)
> ...


Well first off no disrespect taken .. And I would agree that Northen Michigan's public land will NEVER be as good of deer hunting as Northern Missouri. There are private graounds all over the NLP that offer some fantastic deer hunting opportunities. And I am truly envious of the people that have the opportunity to hunt in those places. I would also agree that most of the deer harvested in the NLP on public land are immature. I am a average joe, I do not make a bunch of money, I don't own my own hunting property. i love the outdoors, and try my best to be a advocate for the sport I love. To see deer behaving natually was such an amaizing thing in MO. I hope to see that someday here in NLP.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> So you would feel more comfortable being called a "little antler worshipper"? If the shoe fits, and yes I go by the saying "Go Big or go home". :lol:


Actually, I prefer the term "doe slayer" which is probably more appropriate since I have not harvested a buck of any size since 2000. I think you would be hard pressed to charge me with being antler obsessed.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

muliefever said:


> Well first off no disrespect taken .. And I would agree that Northen Michigan's public land will NEVER be as good of deer hunting as Northern Missouri. There are private graounds all over the NLP that offer some fantastic deer hunting opportunities. And I am truly envious of the people that have the opportunity to hunt in those places. I would also agree that most of the deer harvested in the NLP on public land are immature. I am a average joe, I do not make a bunch of money, I don't own my own hunting property. i love the outdoors, and try my best to be a advocate for the sport I love. To see deer behaving natually was such an amaizing thing in MO. I hope to see that someday here in NLP.


If you think that APR's are the answer to public land hunting in Michigan, why don't you make the drive and hunt in Leelanau Co.?

Tens of thousands of acres of public hunting land and we have had antler restrictions since 2003. There are thousands of 6 year old, 160" bucks running around all over the place due to APR's, heck, they are becoming a nuisance there are so many of them, we need people like you to come up here and thin some out.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Munsterlndr said:


> Actually, I prefer the term "doe slayer" which is probably more appropriate since I have not harvested a buck of any size since 2000. I think you would be hard pressed to charge me with being antler obsessed.


Just wondering why haven't you shot a buck since 2000? 



_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## standsetter (Dec 2, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> If you think that APR's are the answer to public land hunting in Michigan, why don't you make the drive and hunt in Leelanau Co.?
> 
> Tens of thousands of acres of public hunting land and we have had antler restrictions since 2003. There are thousands of 6 year old, 160" bucks running around all over the place due to APR's, heck, they are becoming a nuisance there are so many of them, we need people like you to come up here and thin some out.


A couple guys skilled in the art of "soft tresspass" could clean out the whole county in short order, assuming of course they minimize or eliminate flea dirt on their hunting clothes. :lol:


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

bucksnbows said:


> Just wondering why haven't you shot a buck since 2000?
> 
> 
> 
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


He's working on improving the buck to doe ratio.


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

Munsterlndr said:


> No problem, just jerking your chain.
> 
> I'm lousy with grammar myself, always used to get your and you're wrong until L&O schooled me on that one, just couldn't resist the irony, given the statement that the error was made in.


Agreed. I would've done the same if given the opportunity.



_DWJ_


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> Just wondering why haven't you shot a buck since 2000?
> 
> 
> 
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


A combination of lack of opportunity on some of the properties that I hunt coupled with fortunately being able to obtain antlerless permits for some of the other properties. I don't mind passing on smaller bucks if I have antlerless permits but I also don't have any moral objection to eating yearling backstrap. 

There is certainly an element of laziness and ambivalence at work, as well. If I really cared about bagging a legal buck on my primary property, which is in DMU 045 and under antler restrictions, I'd spend much more time in some of my tree stands and less time in one of my heated blinds but since I really don't care whether or not I shoot a doe or a buck, creature comforts often win out over obsession.


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

> Munsterlndr said:
> 
> 
> > There is certainly an element of laziness and ambivalence at work, as well. If I really cared about bagging a legal buck on my primary property, which is in DMU 045 and under antler restrictions, I'd spend much more time in some of my tree stands and less time on this website.


Say WHAT?!?!?!?!?:yikes::evil::lol:


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> The spin doctor at work.
> 
> Is a person really an antler worshipper if they pass up dozens of bucks waiting for a mature buck? Or is the person who shoots the first 4 point they see, so they can say "I got my buck" the real antler worshipper?


 I cant say I have ever heard "I got my buck". I think you are way off base calling the guys that are not selective "antler worshipers". As someone already pointed out, Nobody goes out there planning to shoot a spike or fork. Maybe you should refer to them as tag fillers, because really for the vast majority thats what it is, They go out there to shoot a legal deer, Regardless of how big the antlers are.

If they are the antler worshipers how come they are not plastering pictures all over the internet of their deer and mounts......Take a look at who it is showing off what they kill......There you will find the antler worshipers.

Hell, I throw them away with the rest of the scraps, And some of them are as big as the management guys hang on the wall. :lol:......But man you should see the femurs I have mounted...... Its nuthin but a piece of bone...get over it.

While we are at it....Can somebody tell me what difference it makes in the big picture if you kill it at 1 1/2 or 2 1/2 ?


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

QDMAMAN said:


> Say WHAT?!?!?!?!?:yikes::evil::lol:


Hey, it sounded better then admitting that I'm a cheap ass bastard who won't spring for an ozone machine for my truck. :lol::lol:


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> There is certainly an element of laziness and ambivalence at work, as well. If I really cared about bagging a legal buck on my primary property, which is in DMU 045 and under antler restrictions, I'd spend much more time in some of my tree stands and less time in one of my heated blinds but since I really don't care whether or not I shoot a doe or a buck, creature comforts often win out over obsession.


Thats funny... reminds me of a cartoon that was posted on here a while back.. read something like.. "Honey I'll be to bed in a minute, someone on the internet is wrong"


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

While we are at it....Can somebody tell me what difference it makes in the big picture if you kill it at 1 1/2 or 2 1/2 ?[/QUOTE]

Big picture......IMO, no difference.



_DWJ_


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

When you quit careing about what you kill, why bother?

I believe there is more to deer hunting than just filling the freezer.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> When you quit careing about what you kill, why bother?
> 
> I believe there is more to deer hunting than just filling the freezer.


There is a lot more to deer hunting then just filling a freezer, it's simply that for some of us the quality of the experience has little to do with the type of deer harvested or the size of a deer's antlers. And if filling the freezer is not part of deer hunting for you, why don't you hunt with a camera instead of a weapon?


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> I believe there is more to deer hunting than just filling the freezer.


 I agree, there is far more to deer hunting than just filling the freezer.


----------



## TwodogsNate (Jul 30, 2009)

Munsterlndr said:


> Actually, I prefer the term "doe slayer" which is probably more appropriate since I have not harvested a buck of any size since 2000. I think you would be hard pressed to charge me with being antler obsessed.


 
Your not any different then most of the QDMA guys that I know. Most have not shot a buck In 10+ years. Most have taken on the role of "doe slayers" in my area. 

In my eyes, When you shoot a deer the work begins. I drag them out, Skin them out and package the whole deer up before I leave camp on Sunday. I drive a car up to deer camp so hauling it back is not an option for me. IMO, Shooting a small buck would be like taking on a job that didn't pay much :lol: If I am going to shoot a buck, It needs to be worth the amount of work involved. No sense in working all weekend if I don't have too :evil: Most of the time I rifle hunt from the cabin window. No sense in getting cold :lol:


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> Rasputin said:
> 
> 
> > Is it just your hope that all of the stupid hunters will just quit hunting so you can have the woods to yourself?QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Standsniper (Feb 7, 2011)

TwodogsNate said:


> In my eyes, When you shoot a deer the work begins. I drag them out, Skin them out and package the whole deer up before I leave camp on Sunday. I drive a car up to deer camp so hauling it back is not an option for me. IMO, Shooting a small buck would be like taking on a job that didn't pay much :lol: If I am going to shoot a buck, It needs to be worth the amount of work involved. No sense in working all weekend if I don't have too :evil: Most of the time I rifle hunt from the cabin window. No sense in getting cold :lol:


 
Ding, Ding, Ding..you nailed it!!!!!


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

swampbuck said:


> I cant say I have ever heard "I got my buck".?


You're not from around here are ya boy? Or maybe you're not listening well enough becuase people in every corner of Michigan say it every year.



swampbuck said:


> I think you are way off base calling the guys that are not selective "antler worshipers". As someone already pointed out, Nobody goes out there planning to shoot a spike or fork. Maybe you should refer to them as tag fillers, because really for the vast majority thats what it is, They go out there to shoot a legal deer, Regardless of how big the antlers are.


Ok then, if you're in an area that allows the harvest of a doe, and you're a tag filler, why would many pass up does waiting for the first hard bone they see, then go BOOM?



swampbuck said:


> If they are the antler worshipers how come they are not plastering pictures all over the internet of their deer and mounts.


Why do those same guys who have a box of antlers in the back of their garage not show them off? You will never see me put someone down for shooting a legal buck but if you're just going to hide the rack from everyone why shoot it? Just for the record I have a 3 small racks hanging on my wall becuase I am PROUD of them, not becuase they're big. 



swampbuck said:


> Hell, I throw them away with the rest of the scraps, And some of them are as big as the management guys hang on the wall. :lol:......But man you should see the femurs I have mounted...... Its nuthin but a piece of bone...get over it.


Why not pass on a buck if it's not about the bone? An adult doe will give you just as much meat as a 1.5 yr old buck.



swampbuck said:


> While we are at it....Can somebody tell me what difference it makes in the big picture if you kill it at 1 1/2 or 2 1/2 ?


Nothing, 2.5 yr olds should get the pass too.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> There is a lot more to deer hunting then just filling a freezer, it's simply that for some of us the quality of the experience has little to do with the type of deer harvested or the size of a deer's antlers. And if filling the freezer is not part of deer hunting for you, why don't you hunt with a camera instead of a weapon?


My family loves venison, so a filled freezer is a good thing. 

But through the years I have gained higher standards than I did when I first started hunting. I really enjoy passing on the shot and letting a deer live another day. 

I take hundreds of trail cam pics of the deer I hunt, and only target the ones I would like to take. For me, hunting the older bucks during the rut is what keeps the fire burning.


----------



## TwodogsNate (Jul 30, 2009)

Standsniper said:


> Ding, Ding, Ding..you nailed it!!!!!


 
I'm just lazy :lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> My family loves venison, so a filled freezer is a good thing.
> 
> But through the years I have gained higher standards than I did when I first started hunting. I really enjoy passing on the shot and letting a deer live another day.
> 
> I take hundreds of trail cam pics of the deer I hunt, and only target the ones I would like to take. For me, hunting the older bucks during the rut is what keeps the fire burning.


Just a stab in the dark here, but I'll bet you are a bow hunter who hunts in the SLP.


----------



## TwodogsNate (Jul 30, 2009)

Munsterlndr said:


> Just a stab in the dark here, but I'll bet you are a bow hunter who hunts in the SLP.


 
Didn't your data from earlier imply that more guys are passing on bucks in the NLP....

Based on that data, Im suprised you didn't guess the NLP?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> Just a stab in the dark here, but I'll bet you are a bow hunter who hunts in the SLP.


Nope, Bowhunter that lives in Traverse City, I hunt kinsley and Buckley area, plus I have access to some land in Evart and Clare that I like hunting. I might have permission to hunt a farm in Leelanau county this season, fingers crossed

I have hunted Iowa and Illinois many times, I think they spoiled me

Not much for doe permits in Grand Traverse county, so I get a permit or two down south.


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

Bloodrunner said:


> Not much for doe permits in Grand Traverse county, so I get a permit or two down south.


Sucks dont it? Thankfully the farm I hunt up here gets DMAPs


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

sbooy42 said:


> Sucks dont it? Thankfully the farm I hunt up here gets DMAPs


It is crazy GT county doesn't give out more permits, I see alot of doe where I hunt , some are in the 5-8 year old range, big and smart.


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

I just showed my dad this thread he called me a pot stirrer and can't understand why everyone just doesn't agree with H to the U double B, H to the unter and walk away. 

_DWJ_


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> You're not from around here are ya boy? Or maybe you're not listening well enough becuase people in every corner of Michigan say it every year.
> 
> 
> Agreed.
> ...


This I don't fully agree with. Most 2.5's should get a pass, but some will sport anltlers that even the most dedicated hunters will not beable to pass on. Just a fact, and nothing wrong with it. Also there is the "QDM ladder" start passing the 1.5's, kill some 2.5's+ building a better understanding on how to hunt older deer, and then take the next step.
I try to kill 3.5 + but I won't lie and say that I won't mistakenly kill a 2.5 or even puposely kill one. Either way it will always be better than killing a 1.5 until the age structure increases.


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

Bloodrunner said:


> It is crazy GT county doesn't give out more permits, I see alot of doe where I hunt , some are in the 5-8 year old range, big and smart.


Try hitting the doe tag mega millions in Benzie and thats if they decide to even give em out in a particular year.:SHOCKED:


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

Don Walters Jr said:


> I just showed my dad this thread he called me a pot stirrer and can't understand why everyone just doesn't agree with H to the U double B, H to the unter and walk away.
> 
> _DWJ_


What fun would that be?


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

Don Walters Jr said:


> I just showed my dad this thread he called me a pot stirrer and can't understand why everyone just doesn't agree with H to the U double B, H to the unter and walk away.
> 
> _DWJ_


Werd


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> Werd


 
nice quote in the signature, Hubb!


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> You're not from around here are ya boy? Or maybe you're not listening well enough becuase people in every corner of Michigan say it every year.
> 
> Must be a SLP thing
> 
> ...


Is there a biological reason for that?


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

wintrrun said:


> nice quote in the signature, Hubb!


 
:lol::lol:

I couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

wintrrun said:


> Try hitting the doe tag mega millions in Benzie and thats if they decide to even give em out in a particular year.:SHOCKED:


:lol: I liked it better when it was OTC first come, first served. Showing up at Meijers at 6:30 in the morning with a cup of coffee and a lawn chair was always a good time!


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

swampbuck said:


> Must be a SLP thing


:lol: 

I hear it every year in the NWLP - even from some of the locals who've been up there for generations


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> :lol: I liked it better when it was OTC first come, first served. Showing up at Meijers at 6:30 in the morning with a cup of coffee and a lawn chair was always a good time!


 
The good ol days


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

Munsterlndr said:


> :lol: I liked it better when it was OTC first come, first served. Showing up at Meijers at 6:30 in the morning with a cup of coffee and a lawn chair was always a good time!


I agree, those were good days.:lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Many people do, why do you ask?
> 
> AR has helped Leelanau County alot, it has actually put them on the map as far as CBM bucks. I think the people there love AR and will never go back to the days of old.
> 
> Now if the rest of the surrounding counties would follow suit, NWLower would be some really fine deer hunting in no time.


I was asking if he takes advantage of the public land under APR's that's available, not whether many people do. He is advocating forcing everyone else in Mason Co. being forced to adopt APR's, yet he is not willing to drive an hour or so to hunt public land where APR's have been in place. 

As far as many people hunting in Leelanau Co., some do and many have stopped hunting there due to APR's. You seem to judge the quality of hunting by the number of book bucks harvested, others may not agree that a few more book bucks harvested every year compensates for the other negative factors which have resulted from APR's. I own property in Leelanau Co. and have been hunting there for the past 25 years or so, how long have you been hunting the leelanau?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> I was asking if he takes advantage of the public land under APR's that's available, not whether many people do. He is advocating forcing everyone else in Mason Co. being forced to adopt APR's, yet he is not willing to drive an hour or so to hunt public land where APR's have been in place.
> 
> As far as many people hunting in Leelanau Co., some do and many have stopped hunting there due to APR's. You seem to judge the quality of hunting by the number of book bucks harvested, others may not agree that a few more book bucks harvested every year compensates for the other negative factors which have resulted from APR's. I own property in Leelanau Co. and have been hunting there for the past 25 years or so, how long have you been hunting the leelanau?


What could be negitive about selective killing? 

No I haven't hunted Leelanau but I know it well from fishing and working up there, I have always had hunting closer to home in Traverse. But I know a few guys that do. Dean Williams out of Cedar (Artistic Wildlife tax.) has done work for me in the past and he seems to be liking AR? I also know Jim Gauthier (Gauthiers Archery) for the last 30 some years and he talks highly from his customers about AR and Leelanau county? We are all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same. Maybe Im missing something?

The farms I hunt in Illinois have a 120" or better rule, and it does nothing but benefit the hunting experience?

So how does AR have a negitive effect?


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

TheGift said:


> do you date your uncles sister?


Careful rookie, word on the street is the gift only goes so far.


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

swampbuck said:


> AR's resulted in 2 or 3 years of very good harvest stats, However since the 5 year aniversary total buck harvest has fallen 20% and hunter success 4%. Judging by what has happened in other areas it will probably continue to fall to around 40-60% of the baseline statistics.
> 
> So we trade bigger antlers for a 50% or so reduction in harvest. I would like to see a truly random survey of hunters in that DMU.
> 
> Bloodrunner if you want the harvest data including by age class, PM me a e-mail address and I will send it to you.


So what do you think the problem is? Less hunters? Less deer? No baiting?


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

There are several ideas........But the harvest data from multiple states and areas speak for themselves.

Heres a good read on antler restrictions

http://msucares.com/pubs/publications/p2427.pdf


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> So how does AR have a negitive effect?


Increase in the number of game violations (Poaching, trespassing, baiting), increased pressure during bow season, decrease in hunter opportunity, decrease in the availability of antlerless permits, to name a few. If you are a trophy bow hunter, you will probably like the results, if not........not so much. 

We are all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same?, No, we are not all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same. A small minority is pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same, some of us are making sure that it won't happen.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> Increase in the number of game violations (Poaching, trespassing, baiting), increased pressure during bow season, decrease in hunter opportunity, decrease in the availability of antlerless permits, to name a few. If you are a trophy bow hunter, you will probably like the results, if not........not so much.
> 
> We are all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same?, No, we are not all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same. A small minority is pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same, some of us are making sure that it won't happen.


Even with baiting you wouldn't want AR? 

Why would there be a decrease in doe permits? GT has hardly any now?

And no Im not a "Trophy deer hunter" here in Mi. I just try and be selective.

I just find it kinda easy to not have to kill little spikes and forkhorns. Hunt a little bit and you could comply with AR without much of a problem. 

3 on a side is not asking for alot? Let the little guys live a year.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Even with baiting you wouldn't want AR?
> 
> Why would there be a decrease in doe permits? GT has hardly any now?
> 
> ...


Greater numbers of bucks in the herd require fewer does be harvested to maintain a static density, hence fewer antlerless permits. 

3 points on a side restriction takes 75% of yearlings and 55% all antlered bucks off the table in the NLP. With an absence of antlerlless permits available in most areas and with reduced populations, APR's significantly reduce hunter opportunity for those hunters who have the primary purpose of just putting some venison in the freezer. The DNR has stated that there is no biological benefit from APR's in the NLP, they are purely social guidelines designed to benefit those hunters who want more bucks, with bigger racks. Why should someone sacrifice putting some meat in the freezer so that you can put some bigger antlers on the wall? If it's so easy for you to harvest a mature buck, why do you need the crutch provided by AR's? 

Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity, what is the practical benefit in letting them live another year and harvesting them as a 2.5 year old, especially during the pre-rut archery season?


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> Increase in the number of game violations (Poaching, trespassing, baiting), increased pressure during bow season, decrease in hunter opportunity, decrease in the availability of antlerless permits, to name a few. If you are a trophy bow hunter, you will probably like the results, if not........not so much.
> 
> We are all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same?, No, we are not all pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same. A small minority is pushing for Grand Traverse to do the same, some of us are making sure that it won't happen.


Increased pressure during bow season is a negative??... :16suspect 

Small minority :lol:


----------



## muliefever (Jul 2, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> Greater numbers of bucks in the herd require fewer does be harvested to maintain a static density, hence fewer antlerless permits.
> 
> 3 points on a side restriction takes 75% of yearlings and 55% all antlered bucks off the table in the NLP. With an absence of antlerlless permits available in most areas and with reduced populations, APR's significantly reduce hunter opportunity for those hunters who have the primary purpose of just putting some venison in the freezer. The DNR has stated that there is no biological benefit from APR's in the NLP, they are purely social guidelines designed to benefit those hunters who want more bucks, with bigger racks. Why should someone sacrifice putting some meat in the freezer so that you can put some bigger antlers on the wall? If it's so easy for you to harvest a mature buck, why do you need the crutch provided by AR's?
> 
> Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity, what is the practical benefit in letting them live another year and harvesting them as a 2.5 year old, especially during the pre-rut archery season?


 
Man to protect 75% of the yearlings sure sounds like a super deal to me! And they would only be off the table for a short time. to answer your quest Mr. Munster.. The benifits is simple.. more meat in the freezer. A 2.5 year old deer is substantially larger then a yearling.. It's science. The added bonus of larger horns is nice as well. And NO one will turn those down!


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

Why don't ya'll just shut your pie-holes.

_DWJ_


----------



## TheGift (Dec 14, 2010)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> Careful rookie, word on the street is the gift only goes so far.
> 
> 
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


 

i am soooooooooooo scared. go drive your tractor to town and pickup your sisters sister.:lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

sbooy42 said:


> Increased pressure during bow season is a negative??... :16suspect
> 
> Small minority :lol:


I seem to recall more then a few verticle bow hunters whining about the increased pressure that they thought crossbows would bring to bow season. :16suspect

Or were they just blowing smoke? :lol:


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

muliefever said:


> Man to protect 75% of the yearlings sure sounds like a super deal to me! And they would only be off the table for a short time. to answer your quest Mr. Munster.. The benifits is simple.. more meat in the freezer. A 2.5 year old deer is substantially larger then a yearling.. It's science. The added bonus of larger horns is nice as well. And NO one will turn those down!


Are you saying that harvesting a 2.5 year old is as easy as harvesting a yearling? No increase in difficulty or less likely hood that a casual hunter will be successful? Because unless that's the case, then they are not just off the table "for a short time". 15 pounds or so of additional usable meat? Meh.......yearlings taste just fine to me. 

Is hunting mature bucks too much of a challenge for you? Why do you want to make it easier?


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

Don Walters Jr said:


> Why don't ya'll just shut your pie-holes.
> 
> _DWJ_


Relax Donny, not your fight.

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

TheGift said:


> i am soooooooooooo scared. go drive your tractor to town and pickup your sisters sister.:lol:


You don't know what is good for you.



_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> Greater numbers of bucks in the herd require fewer does be harvested to maintain a static density, hence fewer antlerless permits.
> 
> 3 points on a side restriction takes 75% of yearlings and 55% all antlered bucks off the table in the NLP. With an absence of antlerlless permits available in most areas and with reduced populations, APR's significantly reduce hunter opportunity for those hunters who have the primary purpose of just putting some venison in the freezer. The DNR has stated that there is no biological benefit from APR's in the NLP, they are purely social guidelines designed to benefit those hunters who want more bucks, with bigger racks. Why should someone sacrifice putting some meat in the freezer so that you can put some bigger antlers on the wall? If it's so easy for you to harvest a mature buck, why do you need the crutch provided by AR's?
> 
> Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity, what is the practical benefit in letting them live another year and harvesting them as a 2.5 year old, especially during the pre-rut archery season?


 
Im thinkin the buck to doe ratio is whacked out beyond control in GT county, maybe that is why,

"Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity" 

Which is completely unacceptable to have 1 1/2 year old bucks doing any breeding, lol!!! That only shows that the very few mature bucks cant keep up with the over abundance of does, so the little bucks are gettin some action. That would NEVER EVER happen in Iowa. 

2 1/2 year olds are lucky to get in on the breeding in Iowa. But their buck to doe ratio's are more in check.

And you are right yearling bucks do taste great, I have killed a ton of em. I just thought it would be nice to see more older bucks runnin around, it makes for a better hunt in my eyes.

Damn Iowa and Illinois, those States done ruined me


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Im thinkin the buck to doe ratio is whacked out beyond control in GT county, maybe that is why,
> 
> "Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity"
> 
> ...


 
I think your mistaken.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

swampbuck said:


> I think your mistaken.


Really? I dont think 110 lb 1 1/2 year old bucks do much breeding, most mature does wont even let them near them, and would stomp their **** if they tried.


Unless you are in a very poor inbred area where there is 25 does to every buck.

And those areas are sad, bunch of little deer runnin around, Evart Mi. comes to mind.


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> I seem to recall more then a few verticle bow hunters whining about the increased pressure that they thought crossbows would bring to bow season. :16suspect


 I agree I am just surprised to see you say it.. considering you made it your personal agenda at the time to push something that would have a negative affect... thank you..

I also now understand your personal reason for joining the APR workgroup... And I was starting to think your constant debating and collection of data was for the benefit of the resource and hunters:lol::lol: silly me


----------



## muliefever (Jul 2, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> Are you saying that harvesting a 2.5 year old is as easy as harvesting a yearling? No increase in difficulty or less likely hood that a casual hunter will be successful? Because unless that's the case, then they are not just off the table "for a short time". 15 pounds or so of additional usable meat? Meh.......yearlings taste just fine to me.
> 
> Is hunting mature bucks too much of a challenge for you? Why do you want to make it easier?


 
15 pounds? ya right.. increase in 2.5 year old deer on the hoof would be nice! and they are more difficult to hunt! Which is good! I believe hunting in Michigan is too easy (to kill a 1.5 year old) and it's more killing then hunting. Anyone can do it. Hunting Mature deer is all I do Mr. Munster, haven't you been reading? But when there is 4 mature deer in all of Mason county, and they are one private land! Man that makes it tuff! Lets level the playing field for all. I can tell you that the Majority of people whom hunt here in Mason county Want to have the opportunity at more Mature deer! ( i am not talking about the weekend warriors from down state that come and shoot the first deer they see) Each year more and more mature deer are being harvested here in Mason county. Private ground co-ops. If it hurts your feelings so badly to not be able to kill a spike, then shoot a doe. It is that simple, then in a few years, you and I both will have the opportunity and more mature deer.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Really? I dont think 110 lb 1 1/2 year old bucks do much breeding, most mature does wont even let them near them, and would stomp their **** if they tried.
> 
> 
> Unless you are in a very poor inbred area where there is 25 does to every buck.
> ...


 The info has been posted several times, and is widely available. You should spend some time doing research on whitetail behavior and biology.

Theres better info about it, but this one was handy...
http://www.buckmanager.com/2011/01/28/whitetail-deer-rut-young-bucks-breeding/


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Im thinkin the buck to doe ratio is whacked out beyond control in GT county, maybe that is why,
> 
> "Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity"
> 
> ...


I just went through posting an explanation of how sex ratios cannot be "whacked out beyond control", it just cannot happen in nature. 1:3 is about the greatest disparity you will find in a free ranging herd. You might want to read that post. 

Read some of the newer articles on whitetail breeding biology, even in a herd with a robust buck age structure, yearlings will participate in the breding process and it happens in Iowa every year. 

So you have killed a ton of yearlings but now have decided that it should be "do as I say, not as I do" for everyone else? How about we let each hunter make up his own mind instead of forcing your standards on them?


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

muliefever said:


> 15 pounds? ya right.. increase in 2.5 year old deer on the hoof would be nice! and they are more difficult to hunt! Which is good! I believe hunting in Michigan is too easy (to kill a 1.5 year old) and it's more killing then hunting. Anyone can do it. Hunting Mature deer is all I do Mr. Munster, haven't you been reading? But when there is 4 mature deer in all of Mason county, and they are one private land! Man that makes it tuff! Lets level the playing field for all. I can tell you that the Majority of people whom hunt here in Mason county Want to have the opportunity at more Mature deer! ( i am not talking about the weekend warriors from down state that come and shoot the first deer they see) Each year more and more mature deer are being harvested here in Mason county. Private ground co-ops. If it hurts your feelings so badly to not be able to kill a spike, then shoot a doe. It is that simple, then in a few years, you and I both will have the opportunity and more mature deer.


So *YOU* are bored with hunting 1.5 year olds and think it's too easy and *YOU *want to make hunting more difficult for everybody because hunting for mature deer is all that *YOU* do. 

Anyone see a pattern here? :lol:

According to MDNR check station data, approx. 45% of the antlered bucks harvested in Mason Co. in 2009 were mature bucks (2.5>) and there were a lot more then 4 of them harvested, so it would appear that a fair number of Mason Co. hunters manage to tag a mature buck without the needed crutch of APR's, maybe you just need to work on improving your hunting skills so that you can climb into that 45% instead of forcing everyone else to change, just to give you a leg up.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

sbooy42 said:


> I agree I am just surprised to see you say it.. considering you made it your personal agenda at the time to push something that would have a negative affect... thank you..
> 
> I also now understand your personal reason for joining the APR workgroup... And I was starting to think your constant debating and collection of data was for the benefit of the resource and hunters:lol::lol: silly me


I supported crossbows because allowing personal choice was and is the right thing to do and because I was firmly convinced that allowing them would not create any negative impact on bow season, which has been borne out with several years of statistics.

I'm a great believer in personal choice, You don't want to use a crossbow? don't use one. You don't want to shoot a spike? don't shoot one. You don't want to use bait? don't use it. Kind of interesting that it's usually the same group of guys that want to deny other hunters the opportunity to make up their own minds and make their own choices and instead want to mandate what other hunters should do. 

The increase in bow hunting pressure in Leelanau Co. is not because of crossbows, it's because of trophy bow hunters wanting to get first crack at larger racks. The observation about increased pressure during bow season and an increase in violations among bow hunters is not mine, it comes from the local CO, Mike Borkavich. 

My involvement on the APR workgroup was to try and insure that decisions were made in the best interest of the resource and the majority of hunters in the state, not the special interests of a select group of elitist's. If you want to impact the direction of deer hunting in Michigan, I suggest you volunteer your time and get involved with trying to effect change.


----------



## droppin lines (Feb 1, 2009)

Bloodrunner said:


> Im thinkin the buck to doe ratio is whacked out beyond control in GT county, maybe that is why,
> 
> "Yearling bucks have already lived a year and many have already made their contribution to genetic diversity"
> 
> ...



And here lies the sole reason *you* want this to happen; for *your own* benefit. Stop trying to push new regulations on the general population for your own benefits. We are all adults here and can make our own decisions on what we want to shoot and want we want to pass up to live another day. We dont need someone or some group telling us how and what to hunt.


----------



## Tom (mich) (Jan 17, 2003)

This thread illustrates just how subjective a term such as "trophy management" is. Many references have been made to attempt to define a "mature" buck as 2.5 y/o+. I'd guess that only happens in Michigan....


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> And those areas are sad, bunch of little deer runnin around, Evart Mi. comes to mind.


I happen to hunt the Evart area, yes there are a lot of little ones running around. There are also quite a few big ones too. Plenty for the trophy hunter to go after.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Justin said:


> I happen to hunt the Evart area, yes there are a lot of little ones running around. There are also quite a few big ones too. Plenty for the trophy hunter to go after.


:lol:

Sorry but I think "quite a few" is a bit of a stretch (but I guess it depends on what your definition of big is ). I put in probably close to a 1000 miles scouting in and around the Dighton area each year and it is a rarity to see a 8pt or better or a deer with antler width outside the ears. And that includes glassing in the mornings and evenings, motion cameras, and shining.

But if you know somewhere in the area that you can view quite a few big ones, please PM me. It's nice to see something other than fields of 30+ antlerless deer in them and small bachelor groups of spikes and forks.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Radar420 said:


> :lol:
> 
> Sorry but I think "quite a few" is a bit of a stretch (but I guess it depends on what your definition of big is ). I put in probably close to a 1000 miles scouting in and around the Dighton area each year and it is a rarity to see a 8pt or better or a deer with antler width outside the ears. And that includes glassing in the mornings and evenings, motion cameras, and shining.
> 
> But if you know somewhere in the area that you can view quite a few big ones, please PM me. It's nice to see something other than fields of 30+ antlerless deer in them and small bachelor groups of spikes and forks.


Just because you cant view them out in the fields doesn't mean they aren't around. You are in the same area that I am. Our cabin is close to Dighton. My brothers and I have all taken 8pts and bigger and we aren't exactly trophy hunters. Last year we saw one that was taken close by that was a 140 class buck. I saw him in the woods about a week before gun season too. They are highly outnumbered by the does and small bucks for sure but that's what makes them special.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Justin said:


> Just because you cant view them out in the fields doesn't mean they aren't around.


Oh, I know that there are a few around, I just disagreed with your premise that there are "quite a few."

The biggest buck I saw last year in the area was about a mile from our property on Nov 14. A very wide 6 with heavy beams in one of the alder swamps.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> :lol:
> 
> Sorry but I think "quite a few" is a bit of a stretch (but I guess it depends on what your definition of big is ). I put in probably close to a 1000 miles scouting in and around the Dighton area each year and it is a rarity to see a 8pt or better or a deer with antler width outside the ears. And that includes glassing in the mornings and evenings, motion cameras, and shining.


According to check station data, 35% of the antlered bucks harvested in that DMU were 2.5 years old or older. Based on the hunter survey numbers, that would mean about 1,500 bucks out of just over 4,000 harvested. I'd say that is quite a few. Heck, around 375 of them were 3.5 years or older, so somebody is bagging them, Ya'll just need to hunt a little harder. :lol:


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> According to check station data, 35% of the antlered bucks harvested in that DMU were 2.5 years old or older.


Yes and DNR data also suggests that this area is at or below population goals as well 

And I thought I've read on this forum before how inaccurate some of the DNR age guesstimates were.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> Yes and DNR data also suggests that this area is at or below population goals as well
> 
> And I thought I've read on this forum before how inaccurate some of the DNR age guesstimates were.


You think that area is above stated goals? If not, what's wiht the rolly eyes?

Sounds to me like there are mature bucks harvested in Osceola County every year. If you are not one of the hunters doing this, maybe you need to hunt harder if that's you goal.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Bloodrunner said:


> Really? *I dont think 110 lb 1 1/2 year old bucks do much breeding, most mature does wont even let them near them, and would stomp their **** if they tried.*
> 
> 
> Unless you are in a very poor inbred area where there is 25 does to every buck.
> ...


 Nope wrong. 1.5 y/o bucks do alot of breeding. Especially in areas with high doe populations. Look at it like this. Does tend to go into heat around the same time, the older more dominant bucks can only handle one doe at a time. So once they have one to breed the younger bucks will get what is not being tended. At the end of the day when the doe is ready she is ready and she will take any willing male, which will be any male that is not already involved. Does are also known to be bread by more than one buck. So when the big guy is done the little guy picks up the sloppy seconds:lol:.
Even in Iowa 1.5 do alot of breeding.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> You think that area is above stated goals? If not, what's wiht the rolly eyes?
> 
> Sounds to me like there are mature bucks harvested in Osceola County every year. If you are not one of the hunters doing this, maybe you need to hunt harder if that's you goal.


Yes, I believe the area is above the stated population goal. Population goals for this area are between 40 - 45 DPSM. I can find multiple fields in the area I scout that have as many, if not more, deer than the population estimate - and it's for miles in every direction. And they're not in fields that represent a sq mile either. I can find evidence of severe browsing in multiple areas where I scout (look in my album).

As for the hunt harder comment, I've done it all. Getting to the blind hours before sun-up, all day sits, long hours and lots of miles pre-season scouting and very little return for that time and effort other than massive quantities of antlerless deer.

I've been thinking about this for the last few weeks and I can't remember a rifle season (save one) where I've seen less than a 100 deer over the course of the season. That would lead to ~1800 deer I've seen while hunting. Would you like to guess how many antlered deer I've seen in that same time? 4 - yes *4* definitive antlered deer sightings. You may think that it's my hunting practices that have led to this disparity but I've had old swamp donkey's so close I could reach out and touch them so I don't think it's my hunting practices. I'm more of the belief that Traditional Deer Management practices have given me some watered down, bastardized version of hunting. Nowadays when I'm lucky to get an antlerless permit, I just slide open the bathroom window and fill the tag.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> (look in my album).
> I've been thinking about this for the last few weeks and I can't remember a rifle season (save one) where I've seen less than a 100 deer over the course of the season.
> 
> 
> > Wow....I havnt seen a hundred deer while hunting in the last 4 years combined, And thats not just rifle season either. :sad:


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

swampbuck said:


> Wow....I havnt seen a hundred deer while hunting in the last 4 years combined, And thats not just rifle season either. :sad:


I know and I feel your pain and I can totally understand why on some of the deer management issues (ie OBR, EAB, APR) we have very different perspectives.


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> I'm a great believer in personal choice, You don't want to use a crossbow? don't use one. You don't want to shoot a spike? don't shoot one. You don't want to use bait? don't use it. Kind of interesting that it's usually the same group of guys that want to deny other hunters the opportunity to make up their own minds and make their own choices and instead want to mandate what other hunters should do. Really???choices :lol: Not even going there
> 
> My involvement on the APR workgroup was to try and insure that decisions were made in the best interest of the resource and the majority of hunters in the state, not the special interests of a select group of elitist's. If you want to impact the direction of deer hunting in Michigan, I suggest you volunteer your time and get involved with trying to effect change.
> I will just have to disagree with your true purpose...But thats just my opinion
> ...





...


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> I know and I feel your pain and I can totally understand why on some of the deer management issues (ie OBR, EAB, APR) we have very different perspectives.


 Yes, VERY different. When I read post's talking about seeing 20 or 30 deer in a sit......I cant even imagine that.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

It varies greatly within the dmu. Our property boarders a huge chunk of state land and the numbers around us are just getting back to were they should be. You would see no were near 100 different deer in a season near us. The big numbers appear to be around the private land/farms. Once again access is the problem.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> I've been thinking about this for the last few weeks and I can't remember a rifle season (save one) where I've seen less than a 100 deer over the course of the season. That would lead to ~1800 deer I've seen while hunting. Would you like to guess how many antlered deer I've seen in that same time? 4 - yes *4* definitive antlered deer sightings. You may think that it's my hunting practices that have led to this disparity but I've had old swamp donkey's so close I could reach out and touch them so I don't think it's my hunting practices. I'm more of the belief that Traditional Deer Management practices have given me some watered down, bastardized version of hunting. Nowadays when I'm lucky to get an antlerless permit, I just slide open the bathroom window and fill the tag.


There are roughly 6,000 or so antlered bucks every year in Osceola Co. The fact that you have seen just 4 in eighteen years of hunting (unless I am misinterpreting what you said) leads me to think that the number of bucks is not the problem.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> The fact that you have seen just 4 in eighteen years of hunting (unless I am misinterpreting what you said) leads me to think that the number of bucks is not the problem.


Yep you are misinterpreting - I only said during rifle hunting. I took up bow hunting a few years ago and it opened up my eyes to what I was missing out on. So now I see a few more antlered deer (and a boatload more antlerless deer), just not older/larger ones. 

But I'm all ears if you want to give me hints on buck hunting, because I can see and get close to numerous antlerless deer as evidence by the sightings. Maybe I should take my uncle's advice and let the 20+ antlerless deer I see in a sit pass by in the hopes that a bruiser is gonna be chasing one of them :lol:

It's kind of puzzling to me that in a DMU that is largely private, with limited antlerless permits, that you would believe that the DMU is underpopulated.

BTW do you find it to be a normal experience to see 20, 30, 40 individual deer at a time and none of them have antlers? Do you think that it is strictly due to my hunting practices - especially when one antlered deer has been harvested from this property in the 31 yrs I've been coming up.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Radar420 said:


> Yep you are misinterpreting - I only said during rifle hunting. I took up bow hunting a few years ago and it opened up my eyes to what I was missing out on. So now I see a few more antlered deer (and a boatload more antlerless deer), just not older/larger ones.
> 
> But I'm all ears if you want to give me hints on buck hunting, because I can see and get close to numerous antlerless deer as evidence by the sightings. Maybe I should take my uncle's advice and let the 20+ antlerless deer I see in a sit pass by in the hopes that a bruiser is gonna be chasing one of them :lol:
> 
> ...


If you are seeing antlered bucks during archery season, just not during firearms season, then I doubt the issue lies with the number of bucks available for harvest and is more likely due to hunting pressure. You didn't mention whether you are hunting private or public land.

As far as seeing 20,30,40 deer at a time, I'd say that's unlikely in that DMU during the fall hunting season. During the summer? Sure and since bucks are segregated into bachelor groups at that time of year, it's not surprising that you would not see any antlers in a large group. During December after they start to yard up? Sure, many of the antlered bucks have been harvested during October and November, so of course there are going to be fewer. If you are seeing 40 antlerless deer in a group in Osceola county during bow season, then either a food source is attracting and concentrating them or else you need to have your glasses checked (joke). 

I don't know why you would be surprised that I think that much of the NLP is under stated population goals. The DNR and most hunters that I talk to feel the same way. If the DNR thought it was over goal, you would see more antlerless permits issued.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> As far as seeing 20,30,40 deer at a time, I'd say that's unlikely in that DMU during the fall hunting season. If you are seeing 40 antlerless deer in a group in Osceola county during bow season, then either a food source is attracting and concentrating them or else you need to have your glasses checked (joke).
> 
> I don't know why you would be surprised that I think that much of the NLP is under stated population goals. The DNR and most hunters that I talk to feel the same way. If the DNR thought it was over goal, you would see more antlerless permits issued.


Munster, you have to take a trip out here to the east side of Osceola on your next jaunt to Lake county  I have seen over 40 deer at a time, numerous times during rifle season (and now during bow season as well) - on my property as well as the neighbors (he'll let me hunt his blind). Some of these fields around here, while I'm doing my fall scouting, have as many as 40+ deer in them. One field about a mile from my property, before it was planted with corn, would routinely have 70 + deer in it (I shudder to think how many are there when the corn is up). There were so many deer there that cars would park along the road so kids could view the deer. And this is in August/September when bucks were in velvet. Seeing over 300 deer in less than an hour of driving around has become common place and I see more deer up north than I ever have down here in the SLP.

As for the second part of your post, most hunters I talk to feel that it is underpopulated as well - of course those same people were used to seeing 200+ deer during rifle season.

BTW I hunt private land. Do you feel that the browse line photos in my album are indicative of an overpopulation issue?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

swampbuck said:


> The info has been posted several times, and is widely available. You should spend some time doing research on whitetail behavior and biology.
> 
> Theres better info about it, but this one was handy...
> http://www.buckmanager.com/2011/01/28/whitetail-deer-rut-young-bucks-breeding/


 
Good read, so the little guys do get some action when the big boys are busy.

Im sure if the buck to doe ratio was better it would happen alot less, too many does for mature bucks to service.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Osceola county has some very large tracts of public land which has had no antlerless permits for years. I believe the deer numbers have come back to good numbers in the last year or two. Hunting is better all the way around than it's been in 15 years. The areas with problems are primarily private land, just like the slp.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

droppin lines said:


> And here lies the sole reason *you* want this to happen; for *your own* benefit. Stop trying to push new regulations on the general population for your own benefits. We are all adults here and can make our own decisions on what we want to shoot and want we want to pass up to live another day. We dont need someone or some group telling us how and what to hunt.


And living by your standards we have no worrys about non-residents or SLP residents wanting to hunt here. The deer hunting will alway be sub-par. 

Northern Mi. is a place to AVOID if you want quality deer hunting. Just the way you personaly like it Maybe you're the one that wants to benefit?


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Good read, so the little guys do get some action when the big boys are busy.
> 
> Im sure if the buck to doe ratio was better it would happen alot less, too many does for mature bucks to service.


Just for grins & giggles, what do you think the B/D ratio is in Grand Traverse County?


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Justin said:


> The areas with problems are primarily private land, just like the slp.


I agree (though I can find some overpopulation issues on land that borders state land), but unlike the SLP, antlerless permits are severely limited on private lands and when a topic comes up regarding changing regulations (ie more antlerless permits, APRs, EAB) there is so much bickering that occurs on any one topic that the status quo becomes preferable. I'm just tired of the status quo.

I see change occur in other parts of the state that I could really get down with and that I think would work here (ie combo tags being used for antlerless deer during rifle season, more antlerless permits, EAS) but too many people want to hold onto their old traditions that nothing changes.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Antlerless tags are a slippery slope.....You could end up like this area.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Justin said:


> I happen to hunt the Evart area, yes there are a lot of little ones running around. There are also quite a few big ones too. Plenty for the trophy hunter to go after.


 
I have noticed alot of adult really small does? So small I couldn't get my self to fill my doe permit last year. The Camp I hunt is on 50 rd.

And you're right, I have seen some decent bucks.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> According to check station data, 35% of the antlered bucks harvested in that DMU were 2.5 years old or older. Based on the hunter survey numbers, that would mean about 1,500 bucks out of just over 4,000 harvested. I'd say that is quite a few. Heck, around 375 of them were 3.5 years or older, so somebody is bagging them, Ya'll just need to hunt a little harder. :lol:


You and your "check station data" LOL!


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Radar420 said:


> I agree (though I can find some overpopulation issues on land that borders state land), but unlike the SLP, antlerless permits are severely limited on private lands and when a topic comes up regarding changing regulations (ie more antlerless permits, APRs, EAB) there is so much bickering that occurs on any one topic that the status quo becomes preferable. I'm just tired of the status quo.
> 
> I see change occur in other parts of the state that I could really get down with and that I think would work here (ie combo tags being used for antlerless deer during rifle season, more antlerless permits, EAS) but too many people want to hold onto their old traditions that nothing changes.


I don't mind change if it works for everyone involved. What you suggest sounds fine for the private land hunter, not so much for the public land guy. They haven't had antlerless permits for years...why would you allow combos to be used for antlerless? The problem with more antlerless permits on private land is that landowners are drawing and holding deer on their land on purpose, then bitching about it. Change just for change makes no sense. If you are that unhappy where you are try hunting somewhere else. I hunt all over the state and keep coming back.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

swampbuck said:


> Antlerless tags are a slippery slope.....You could end up like this area.


Yeah, I know, but if this area got down to numbers like you experience, it would be more about the hunting instead of population control. I could live with only shooting does if a) the hunt for the animal was more difficult than the procurement of an antlerless tag or b) I felt that it was meaningful population control. Right now, with the rules in place, neither is the case.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> I have noticed alot of adult really small does? So small I couldn't get my self to fill my doe permit last year. The Camp I hunt is on 50 rd.
> 
> And you're right, I have seen some decent bucks.


Well I took a huge 5 year old doe a couple years ago, but on average they are smaller than what I see down around Kent county. I would expect that, food isn't as good and the winters are much tougher.


----------



## Radar420 (Oct 7, 2004)

Justin said:


> I don't mind change if it works for everyone involved. What you suggest sounds fine for the private land hunter, not so much for the public land guy. They haven't had antlerless permits for years...why would you allow combos to be used for antlerless? The problem with more antlerless permits on private land is that landowners are drawing and holding deer on their land on purpose, then bitching about it. Change just for change makes no sense. If you are that unhappy where you are try hunting somewhere else. I hunt all over the state and keep coming back.


I wouldn't mind if they gave out more antlerless permits for public land hunters - why should the financial burden of population control fall solely on the private land owner.

As for hunting somewhere else, I'm exploring that avenue, I think I'm gonna look into some public land hunting.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Radar420 said:


> I wouldn't mind if they gave out more antlerless permits for public land hunters - why should the financial burden of population control fall solely on the private land owner.
> 
> As for hunting somewhere else, I'm exploring that avenue, I think I'm gonna look into some public land hunting.


If you are serious about that I can pm you a good area close by.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

Radar420 said:


> .............
> Do you think that it is strictly due to my hunting practices - especially when one antlered deer has been harvested from this property in the 31 yrs I've been coming up.


One buck from a piece of property in 31 years ? Did you say how many acres ? Is it completely into asparagus or something like that the deer don't like ?
You might want to consider hunting a SGA in one of the high deer density areas in the middle of the state.

L & O


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> Just for grins & giggles, what do you think the B/D ratio is in Grand Traverse County?


Please tell, Im sure your "check station data" will inform us all


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> They VOTED it in Leelanau County "twice" nobody forced anybody into doing anything, so they must like AR?
> 
> So why cant other counties vote it in also?
> 
> ...


If the "*they*" you are referring to is a non-random sample that had been told there were biological benefits resulting from APR's, despite the fact that they are purely social in nature, then yes, "*they*" voted on it. 

"*they*" also voted Obama, Granholm and Debbie Stabenow into office. Still convinced that "*they*" know what they are doing? :lol:

Other counties might have a chance to vote it in depending on the outcome of the NRC APR workgroup and whether the NRC decides to follow their recommendations. Time will tell. 

If your son decides on his own to impose his own 3 point standard, more power to him. If he's being forced to adhere to that standard, that's, IMHO, a shame.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> I think GT county has doe dying of old age and is over populated in areas, but they still give out very few permits. Where I live, spider lake area we are over run by doe
> 
> I would love to know how they "guess" the population and ratios.


Statistical analysis of data gathered from several different sources, primarily from the annual hunter harvest survey that is sent to over 40,000 hunters every year, which is a huge sample size statistically. 

If you seriously think that the DNR's methods for for estimating populations, harvest, etc are flawed, I'd suggest you give Brian Frawley of the MDNR a call, he has a powerpoint presentation that goes through the process step by step, which is very educational.


----------



## oxdog66 (Mar 8, 2011)

Obama granholm stabenow priceless humor 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## droppin lines (Feb 1, 2009)

Can anyone give me any sound evidence by an *unbiased* biologist as to the benefits of AR on the deer heard? I qoogled it and the only benefits I could find were presented by the QDMA, which is obviously biased, and were not presented with any scientific studies. 

This is a serious question, I would like to know what people are basing their rational thinking on.

Please, If you answer this please include a link to the web site that published the research results.


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> If the "*they*" you are referring to is a non-random sample that had been told there were biological benefits resulting from APR's, despite the fact that they are purely social in nature, then yes, "*they*" voted on it.
> 
> "*they*" also voted Obama, Granholm and Debbie Stabenow into office. Still convinced that "*they*" know what they are doing? :lol:
> 
> ...


Im done argueing, and like you said, time will tell. AR or not im still huntin.

And for your information, a 3 point standard is not a big challenge, Im thinking even you could manage it, that is, if you started to care


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

Tom (mich) said:


> This thread illustrates just how subjective a term such as "trophy management" is. Many references have been made to attempt to define a "mature" buck as 2.5 y/o+. I'd guess that only happens in Michigan....


Where are from Tom? Hahahaha

_DWJ_


----------



## Manthus (Jul 5, 2010)

initially, I was for this APR stuff, and as a person that is hunting for a mature buck versus hunting 1.5's, I think they might be wrong.

We are letting a few select hunters make the decisions for the state. What about when we introduce new hunters to the sport (kids, wife, Dad, whoever)...telling them they need to shoot a certain sized buck seems counter-productive to the initial goal - try the sport, be successful, hunt successive seasons.

I think the number of bucks will rise incrementally if we implement something, but it may take a few years. That few years may make the hunting suck for a few, but I have hopes that big buck sightings will get better. 

But seriously, letting a small proportion of the population make the decisions, I would pass on that.


----------



## MarkSend (Mar 11, 2008)

The easy way to decide the matter would be have the dnr sell two different tags. One tag would be for three points on one side or more. The other tag would be like it is now for most dmus, three inch antler or bigger. The hunter can choose which tag to buy but can not buy both tags. Kind of the proverbal put your money where your mouth is. And this way every hunter would able to "vote" on the antler point restictions.


----------



## Manthus (Jul 5, 2010)

MarkSend said:


> The easy way to decide the matter would be have the dnr sell two different tags. One tag would be for three points on one side or more. The other tag would be like it is now for most dmus, three inch antler or bigger. The hunter can choose which tag to buy but can not buy both tags. Kind of the proverbal put your money where your mouth is. And this way every hunter would able to "vote" on the antler point restictions.


Mark - what would be the difference between the two tags? Realistically, the tags need to be mutually exclusive - meaning one won't work when the other does and vice versa. If there is no benefit to the restricted tag, it seems people would buy their "insurance" tag - the one that covers the most scenarios.


----------



## droppin lines (Feb 1, 2009)

droppin lines said:


> Can anyone give me any sound evidence by an *unbiased* biologist as to the benefits of AR on the deer heard? I qoogled it and the only benefits I could find were presented by the QDMA, which is obviously biased, and were not presented with any scientific studies.
> 
> This is a serious question, I would like to know what people are basing their rational thinking on.
> 
> Please, If you answer this please include a link to the web site that published the research results.



I hate to quote myself, but I thought Bloodrunner, in his infinite wisdom on the subject, would have been able to enlighten me on this subject. After all, it is for the betterment of the herd, is it not?


----------



## MarkSend (Mar 11, 2008)

The difference between the two tags is simple. One tag allows you to shoot any buck the other tag allows you to shoot a buck that has three points or better on one side. The hunter can only buy only one of the two tags. That way each hunter is voting for or against apr.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> If the "*they*" you are referring to is a non-random sample that had been told there were biological benefits resulting from APR's, despite the fact that they are purely social in nature, then yes, "*they*" voted on it.
> 
> "*they*" also voted Obama, Granholm and Debbie Stabenow into office. Still convinced that "*they*" know what they are doing? :lol:


Just curious how you know the people in the "non
random sample" voted for Obama, Ganholm and Stabenow? That is what you are saying here is'nt it?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

droppin lines said:


> I hate to quote myself, but I thought Bloodrunner, in his infinite wisdom on the subject, would have been able to enlighten me on this subject. After all, it is for the betterment of the herd, is it not?


"infinite wisdom" LOL!

No that aint me buddy, I just like to kill big deer is all I would rather go hungry than hang a spike.

Are you one of those guys that cant release a fish? Do you kill Jakes? Just wondering


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

radiosped said:


> *Why is Trophy Management a Bad Thing?*
> 
> Just Because


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## William H Bonney (Jan 14, 2003)

Wow...!

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any more funny... :lol:


----------



## Red Arrow (May 9, 2009)

radiosped said:


> *Why is Trophy Management a Bad Thing?*
> 
> Just Because


HeHe, :lol:


----------



## droppin lines (Feb 1, 2009)

Bloodrunner said:


> "infinite wisdom" LOL!
> 
> No that aint me buddy, I just like to kill big deer is all I would rather go hungry than hang a spike.
> 
> Are you one of those guys that cant release a fish? Do you kill Jakes? Just wondering



Another reason your agenda here will get you no where fast (your making my case for me). Again, stop pushing your wants and views on other people!


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

droppin lines said:


> Another reason your agenda here will get you no where fast (your making my case for me). Again, stop pushing your wants and views on other people!


I just noticed you're from Clare? LOL!!!!!

I have NEVER EVER had to kill anything less than a 3 on a side in Clare? 

You would have to have the patience of a 3rd grader to kill a spike or forkhorn in Clare?

We have a camp in Clare and see alot more APR legal bucks than the little ones you like to kill?

You're the one with an agenda Pretty sad you cant let a little deer walk.

Answer my question, have you ever let a fish live? Do you kill Jake turkeys?


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> I just noticed you're from Clare? LOL!!!!!
> 
> I have NEVER EVER had to kill anything less than a 3 on a side in Clare?
> 
> ...


It sounds like you have it pretty good. Can't you just be happy and leave everyone else alone? Why push your views on others?


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Justin said:


> It sounds like you have it pretty good. Can't you just be happy and leave everyone else alone? Why push your views on others?


Im not pushin dude, kill what you want.

But what is your reason for not wanting to let little bucks live?


----------



## fourpoint2 (Sep 22, 2008)

I will take the first good kill shot that is offered.
And it doesn't matter on sex or size.
After I put that one in the freezer I may be more selective. Or not.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

Bloodrunner said:


> Im not pushin dude, kill what you want.
> 
> But what is your reason for not wanting to let little bucks live?


If I have meat in the freezer they get a pass. Otherwise, I will shoot the biggest one I see. Whether I shoot or not depends on many things.


----------



## William H Bonney (Jan 14, 2003)

Bloodrunner said:


> ...But what is your reason for not wanting to let little bucks live?


Spite.


----------



## Justin (Feb 21, 2005)

William H Bonney said:


> Spite.


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Antlers sure do drive hunters crazy.

Most hunters don't have the desire or time to do what it takes to try to be consistant on shooting older bucks. 
Bucks, socially speaking, hold more value to hunters than does, this is why a buck, any buck is considered more of a trophy by the majority of hunters. Some (like myself) find that not just any buck will do any more and take measures to accomplish the goal of killing a larger antlered, older bucks. This will eventually lead to "if more hunters let the little ones go..............." and all the subjects that lead to getting more of what we want in the woods. Nothing wrong with wanting and wishing, but trying to force our desires on those who could careless never works.
Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important, shooting a buck is not important and realize hunting is a privilage, not a right and learn to just enjoy their time afield, passing up a young buck, or a doe in low deer densities, etc, becomes an enjoyable experience.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> Antlers sure do drive hunters crazy.


Yeah, they drive some people crazy enough to try and pass laws to force their way of hunting down everyone else's throat. :lol:


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

william h bonney said:


> spite.


 
lol!!


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

bucksnbows said:


> Antlers sure do drive hunters crazy.
> 
> Most hunters don't have the desire or time to do what it takes to try to be consistant on shooting older bucks.
> Bucks, socially speaking, hold more value to hunters than does, this is why a buck, any buck is considered more of a trophy by the majority of hunters. Some (like myself) find that not just any buck will do any more and take measures to accomplish the goal of killing a larger antlered, older bucks. This will eventually lead to "if more hunters let the little ones go..............." and all the subjects that lead to getting more of what we want in the woods. Nothing wrong with wanting and wishing, but trying to force our desires on those who could careless never works.
> Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important, shooting a buck is not important and realize hunting is a privilage, not a right and learn to just enjoy their time afield, passing up a young buck, or a doe in low deer densities, etc, becomes an enjoyable experience.


 
Great post!


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important


*Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important....*we will lose a significant amount of support for our sport from the non-hunting public, who by and large view hunting for meat as a reasonable and laudable tradition, while viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

I shoot whatever legal deer presents itself (except no does right now due to low density) I hunt venison not antlers. I am not concerned with a bucks age because the DNR has stated that there is NO BIOLOGICAL REASON for me to be concerned about it.




Bloodrunner said:


> But what is your reason for not wanting to let little bucks live?


 So why do you insist on passing little bucks ?


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> *Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important....*we will lose a significant amount of support for our sport from the non-hunting public, who by and large view hunting for meat as a reasonable and laudable tradition, while viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature.


:lol:great post:lol:


----------



## HUBBHUNTER (Aug 8, 2007)

Munsterlndr said:


> while viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature.


 
:lol::lol: Classic Munster right there.


----------



## droppin lines (Feb 1, 2009)

Bloodrunner said:


> I just noticed you're from Clare? LOL!!!!!
> 
> I have NEVER EVER had to kill anything less than a 3 on a side in Clare?
> 
> ...


What exactly do you assume my agenda is?

I am not going to answer your question because in has no bearing on this thread. What I kill or what I keep to eat is for me to decide not for you to ridicule. I do not care what you kill or what you don't kill, so stop patting yourself on the back. If you were a sportsman you would respect the choice of other hunters to take what the law allows them too, and stop trying to push your own wants and needs down everyone else's gullet. Your not going to get anywhere trying to take rights, and the the freedom of choice, away from hunters with out any sound scientific data that you seem to not be able to produce. Hell the DNR aren't even on your side! 

As far as me living in Clare. We had a AR program set in place several years ago (which was forced upon us) for a trial period of five years. I never did hear about the results, but it was sure voted out quickly after the five years were up.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

droppin lines said:


> As far as me living in Clare. We had a AR program set in place several years ago (which was forced upon us) for a trial period of five years. I never did hear about the results, but it was sure voted out quickly after the five years were up.


According to the DNR the results were "inconclusive".


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

swampbuck said:


> I shoot whatever legal deer presents itself (except no does right now due to low density) I hunt venison not antlers. I am not concerned with a bucks age because the DNR has stated that there is NO BIOLOGICAL REASON for me to be concerned about it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Because there is no challenge in killing little bucks, they're the dumbest animal in the woods. They flock to bait piles and get murdered by the thousands


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Munsterlndr said:


> According to the DNR the results were "inconclusive".


I have noticed an increase in buck population since the baiting ban.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Munsterlndr said:


> *Once the rest of the hunting community realizes that filling the freezer is not important....*we will lose a significant amount of support for our sport from the non-hunting public, who by and large view hunting for meat as a reasonable and laudable tradition, while viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature.


Wrong. The hunters need to realize that filling the freezer is not important. "To fill my freezer..........." how many times do we hear that. That may be a reason to kill a deer, but that is not the reason most hunt. The non hunting public really doesn't know why we hunt, they may believe it is primarily for meat, but in todays times it is not why we hunt. We hunt because we enjoy it. Filling the freezer is an added bonus, bigger bucks is the added bonus to passing young ones, the fact that there are deer and they need to be controlled via hunting is an added bonus to us who love to hunt. Going hunting and shooting a deer just to fill the freezer may be a perfectly fine, but not such an important a task to accomplish like many who say that is the reason they killed this deer or that one, like shooting big bucks, not important, like passing young bucks, not important, baiting, not important, food plots, not important, enjoying the fact that we can hunt, very important.
Your round about ways of belittling those who chose to "trophy hunt" with comments such as 
*" Viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature."*
only make you as guilty as those who scoff at hunters who legally kill bucks that trophy hunters wouldn't. Two wrongs don't make a right and for someone such as your self who is consistant at pointing out how mistaken many of us are with our view on all things involved with hunting, I would expect better. 
By the way I am a trophy hunter and would have no fear in comparing "inadequacies"


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> Wrong. The hunters need to realize that filling the freezer is not important. "To fill my freezer..........." how many times do we hear that. That may be a reason to kill a deer, but that is not the reason most hunt. The non hunting public really doesn't know why we hunt, they may believe it is primarily for meat, but in todays times it is not why we hunt. We hunt because we enjoy it. Filling the freezer is an added bonus, bigger bucks is the added bonus to passing young ones, the fact that there are deer and they need to be controlled via hunting is an added bonus to us who love to hunt. Going hunting and shooting a deer just to fill the freezer may be a perfectly fine, but not such an important a task to accomplish like many who say that is the reason they killed this deer or that one, like shooting big bucks, not important, like passing young bucks, not important, baiting, not important, food plots, not important, enjoying the fact that we can hunt, very important.
> Your round about ways of belittling those who chose to "trophy hunt" with comments such as
> *" Viewing trophy hunting as an undesirable, elitist activity pursued by men with low self esteem, who are compensating for certain inadequacies dealt them by nature."*
> only make you as guilty as those who scoff at hunters who legally kill bucks that trophy hunters wouldn't. Two wrongs don't make a right and for someone such as your self who is consistant at pointing out how mistaken many of us are with our view on all things involved with hunting, I would expect better.
> By the way I am a trophy hunter and would have no fear in comparing "inadequacies"


I think you misunderstood my post that you quoted. Those are not my sentiments, they are sentiments expressed by a large segment of the non-hunting public. Regardless of whether it's an accurate portrayal, they view hunters as largely divided into two categories, meat hunters and trophy hunters. Even among liberals, hunting for food is generally seen as an acceptable endeavor, while hunting for trophies is largely seen by non-hunters as an exercise in ego, much akin to having a trophy blond wife with fake boobs. You can insist that the motives of trophy hunters are pure and that it's the guy who shoots the first deer that comes along that is the problem but my guess is that you would have a very hard time selling that to the non-hunting public, who's support we depend on to be able to continue our sport. It's not the public face that we should put on the sport, in my opinion.

If you want an example, here is a thread from a liberal political forum that I follow, it's a pretty fair representation of how hunting is viewed by many non-hunters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4968001


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Of course (except for the animal rights folks) no one is going to oppose hunting for food.
Your link only proves my point........the non hunting public really doesn't know the facts on why anyone hunts, they only assume or are completely clueless.
My point is we hunters need to get a grip on what is really important.......and that is the fact we get to hunt ..........so enjoy it.
Every October 1 as I sit in my tree stand and the day comes to life I am reminded of why I am there, nothing can ever compete with that feeling.

By the way I didn't misunderstand the quote, those are your words and your way of taking jabs. It doesn't bother me, but it does show some hypocricy.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> Of course (except for the animal rights folks) no one is going to oppose hunting for food.
> Your link only proves my point........the non hunting public really doesn't know the facts on why anyone hunts, they only assume or are completely clueless.
> My point is we hunters need to get a grip on what is really important.......and that is the fact we get to hunt ..........so enjoy it.
> Every October 1 as I sit in my tree stand and the day comes to life I am reminded of why I am there, nothing can ever compete with that feeling.


And my point is that de-emphasizing the importance of hunters hunting to obtain venison to eat and instead saying that filling the freezer is unimportant and instead emphasizing the excitement of pursuing large racked bucks, is a perfect formula for eroding popular public support for hunting among the non-hunting public. Wander down that path very far and very soon you will be encouraged to hunt with a camera instead of a rifle.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

Munsterlndr said:


> And my point is that de-emphasizing the importance of hunters hunting to obtain venison to eat and instead saying that filling the freezer is unimportant and instead emphasizing the excitement of pursuing large racked bucks, is a perfect formula for eroding popular public support for hunting among the non-hunting public. Wander down that path very far and very soon you will be encouraged to hunt with a camera instead of a rifle.


 The only thing that needs to be emphasized to the non hunting public is why we actually have hunting in todays modern era and it aint to fill the freezer. 
I am not saying we need to put emphasis on hunting big bucks to the non hunting public. Why would we? I am not even suggesting that is what needs to be a focus to the hunting public. Infact my whole input in the last few posts has nothing to do with the non hunting public. My point again is what is really important is why most people hunt and have seem to forgot the root to that.................because we really enjoy the sport and should be thankful we can. 
What gets a person completely hooked on hunting? I bet it isn't the meat.


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

Some people do still hunt as part of the hunter gatherer mindset. They are part of the food chain not antler collecters.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

bucksnbows said:


> The only thing that needs to be emphasized to the non hunting public is why we actually have hunting in todays modern era and it aint to fill the freezer.
> I am not saying we need to put emphasis on hunting big bucks to the non hunting public. Why would we? I am not even suggesting that is what needs to be a focus to the hunting public. Infact my whole input in the last few posts has nothing to do with the non hunting public. My point again is what is really important is why most people hunt and have seem to forgot the root to that.................because we really enjoy the sport and should be thankful we can.
> What gets a person completely hooked on hunting? I bet it isn't the meat.


I would disagree that filling the freezer is not an important part of why a large number of hunters participate in the sport. Is it the only reason? No, of course not but it's right up there towards the top for a whole lot of hunters. They don't tend to be the ones who join exclusive clubs, or go to NRC meetings or enter their harvest in some book or even frequent forums like this, but they exist in large numbers and they express their motivation by buying licenses and killing about 450,000 deer every year. Call them the silent majority but ignore them or ridicule them at your peril, they provide the engine that allows the hunting vehicle to exist.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

plugger said:


> Some people do still hunt as part of the hunter gatherer mindset. They are part of the food chain not antler collecters.


 Yes absolutely! And we may not have to hunt for meat, But my family likes it and the stores in my area dont carry it.

bucks&bows , Maybe you should explain to us the benifits of having parts of a dead animals hanging all over your house..........


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Some people care, and want to improve their game. 

And some people dont.


It is that way with everything, even deer hunting.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Bloodrunner said:


> Some people care, and want to improve *their* game.


You improving your game is not the issue, it's imposing your definition of what the game is all about on others that creates the friction.


----------



## feedinggrounds (Jul 21, 2009)

The money I save filling my freezer.... now helps fill my gas tank :sad: I hunt to fill my freezer same as I grow a garden. My trapline pays for all my license fee$ Antlers make good knife handles,buttons,dust collectors, wife won't let me hang them in the house any how.


----------



## thunder river outfitters (Aug 21, 2007)

hunting man said:


> With the number of hunters we have in Michigan. There will never be enough bucks for all of us to get one. The numbers speak for themself. Too many hunters and not enough deer to go around. If you are taking deer on a regular basis you should feel real lucky you did. Many many hunters are not going to be able to take a buck. It doesnt matter who or how they manage the deer herd. We will never have 600,000 bucks.


the state of P.A started an apr about 8 years ago. they have the same amount of hunters and deer as we do. it is working out just fine for them. half the state is under 3 or more, the other 4 or more on 1 side. p.a had the same issues we are going thru right now, but the difference is they state did something about it. i do have freinds their that are not qdmers, not trophy hunters and were meat hunters until this happened. now they are knocking down the biggest bucks they ever have and still fill the freezer like they used to. the only draw back they said was , the first year or 2 was pretty tuff watching younger bucks walk, but now are killing giants. 
i am sure alot of hunters here in michigan have gone without harvesting bucks for 3-4 years in a row. i do believe there needs to be some sort of apr invloved. obr wont work because less then 5% of hunters harvest 2 bucks anyway.


----------



## traditional (Mar 14, 2007)

"The hunter needs to realize that filling the freezer is not important".

Than why do hunters kill anything at all ? Paint crosshairs on a camera, take a picture, and you can prove you outsmarted that wise old buck without ending the life of the animal.

"We hunt because we enjoy it"

You enjoy ending an animals life! You enjoy blood on your hands. Really.

"Deer need to be controlled via hunting".

Ask the hunters in the UP. You want to control the deer population add a couple wolves. They are much better at controlling the deer population and actually consume their prey.

Before you get your undies in a bunch, I use to hunt. I support consumtive hunting.

A Personal story.

I have relation that Trophy hunts. This person killed a beautiful buck. He drove that animal around for days showing it off to people whether they wanted to see it or not. I went to his house a couple of days before christmas and there hanging in the garage was the carcass of this animal. Unusable! Of course the most important part (antlers and cape) where at the taxidermist. I said "What a waste". He laughed and said "Coyote bait". That my friend is when I stepped back and wondered what exactly are we doing. Why do we do what we do?

Go ahead thinking Trophy hunting is exceptible. I use to hunt and this made me sick. I know this won't be very well recieved but I also think you need to step back and ask yourself. Why do we do what we do.

Thanks for listening.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

swampbuck said:


> Yes absolutely! And we may not have to hunt for meat, But my family likes it and the stores in my area dont carry it.
> 
> bucks&bows , Maybe you should explain to us the benifits of having parts of a dead animals hanging all over your house..........


There is no benifit to putting a buck on the wall. I never said there was. I also never said that having an older age structure will improve the herd in terms of health. 
Again.....why do most hunters hunt? To fill the freezer.....no.....to kill big bucks......no......because we enjoy being outdoors chasing those critters......yes. 
Again, putting a deer or two in the freezer.....bonus.....putting a buck on the wall.....bonus.
If you hunt only because you need the food and only because you need food, you are not most hunters. If you hunt because you want to kill, you are not most hunters.
Now everyone be honest with yourself and answer the questions to yourself. Why do I hunt? Why do I enjoy hunting? Of all the things that I get out of hunting, what keeps me returning?
For me....
Because I think it is fun.
I enjoy being outdoors in the woods and swamps and seeing deer and trying to out smart them
Hunting gives me a feeling that I can't even describe, there is just something about it that consumes my thoughts and actions everyday of my life and the actual act of hunting an animal and experiencing everything that happens within that act only makes it sweeter.
I have felt that way my whole life even when I was a little boy pretending I was hunting on the farm behind my house.


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

"locked"

_DWJ_


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

Don Walters Jr said:


> "locked"
> 
> _DWJ_


Nobody likes a quitter


----------



## Don Walters Jr (Dec 21, 2009)

Bloodrunner said:


> Nobody likes a quitter


300. One of my favorite movies.

_DWJ_


----------



## Bloodrunner (Feb 3, 2011)

thunder river outfitters said:


> the state of P.A started an apr about 8 years ago. they have the same amount of hunters and deer as we do. it is working out just fine for them. half the state is under 3 or more, the other 4 or more on 1 side. p.a had the same issues we are going thru right now, but the difference is they state did something about it. i do have freinds their that are not qdmers, not trophy hunters and were meat hunters until this happened. now they are knocking down the biggest bucks they ever have and still fill the freezer like they used to. the only draw back they said was , the first year or 2 was pretty tuff watching younger bucks walk, but now are killing giants.
> i am sure alot of hunters here in michigan have gone without harvesting bucks for 3-4 years in a row. i do believe there needs to be some sort of apr invloved. obr wont work because less then 5% of hunters harvest 2 bucks anyway.


 
APR put PA on the map!

Many people in Mi. are AFRAID of change, they think apr will end their hunting success.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

thunder river outfitters said:


> the state of P.A started an apr about 8 years ago.


And since PA instituted APR's, the antlered buck harvest has been reduced by approx. 50% and they have lost around 250,000 hunters. It was not just a matter of having to wait a year or two for the buck harvest to return to what it had been, it has been permanently halved. In Michigan, that would mean about 100,000 fewer successful hunters every fall. 

PA also engaged in a massive herd reduction effort simultaneously with the APR's and many hunters in PA think that the HR efforts have more to do with the increase in antler development that they are seeing then the APR's did. You want to see the herd in the area that you hunt in reduced a further 50%? I sure don't. There are some DMU's in PA where the herd is down to 5 DPSM. Reduce densities to that level and then see how excited most hunters are about going out in the woods.


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

BnB, I'll answer your question "Why do I hunt?". This might come accross as a little silly, and maybe a little difficult to put in words, but for me a big part of it is the connection of me as part of nature, to nature. Sure, I don't need the meat to survive, nor is the idea that venison is so far superior to store bought meat a factor. The vension tastes good to me because it represents independence, a representation that I can survive, the illusion (because that is all it really is) of self-sufficiency.

The idea of the "challenge" comes across as important in a lot of these discussions about deer hunting. For me, the challlenge of proving to myself that I can face the elements and prove some level of self-sufficiency is the challenge and the reward. The atithesis of hunting and fishing for is taking quarry and treating as a status symbol. Yes, I would think it was cool to shoot a big buck, but if my only goal in hunting was to shoot the buck for bragging rights and my ego's sake, then I have missed the mark that I set for myself. I do it for me, not for what others will think of me.

Not so much trying to be "the noble savage" as it is escaping from society/culture to get back to the basics and prove to myself that I can make it and belong in nature.

Does that make any sense?


----------



## standsetter (Dec 2, 2007)

Rasputin said:


> BnB, I'll answer your question "Why do I hunt?". This might come accross as a little silly, and maybe a little difficult to put in words, but for me a big part of it is the connection of me as part of nature, to nature. Sure, I don't need the meat to survive, nor is the idea that venison is so far superior to store bought meat a factor. The vension tastes good to me because it represents independence, a representation that I can survive, the illusion (because that is all it really is) of self-sufficiency.
> 
> The idea of the "challenge" comes across as important in a lot of these discussions about deer hunting. For me, the challlenge of proving to myself that I can face the elements and prove some level of self-sufficiency is the challenge and the reward. The atithesis of hunting and fishing for is taking quarry and treating as a status symbol. Yes, I would think it was cool to shoot a big buck, but if my only goal in hunting was to shoot the buck for bragging rights and my ego's sake, then I have missed the mark that I set for myself. I do it for me, not for what others will think of me.
> 
> ...


Makes sense to me.

A lot of things make sense if we don't first assign motive to other people's actions and beliefs.

All arguments revolve around motivation in one form or another. Too much, too little, wrong reason, right reason...it's endless and the only purpose it serves is to offer the needy a toehold on the platform of righteousness.


----------



## KPC (Jan 29, 2000)

standsetter said:


> All arguments revolve around motivation in one form or another. Too much, too little, wrong reason, right reason...it's endless and the only purpose it serves is to offer the needy a toehold on the platform of righteousness.


That, and the purpose for thousands and thousands of internet message boards.



KPC


----------



## standsetter (Dec 2, 2007)

KPC said:


> That, and the purpose for thousands and thousands of internet message boards.
> 
> 
> 
> KPC


True. What is a forum if not a platform?

Even the smartest living man needs the occasional confirmation of his supremacy. Those of us who are less than, need it more frequently and are noticeably less subtle in our quest. :help:


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

traditional said:


> "The hunter needs to realize that filling the freezer is not important".
> 
> Than why do hunters kill anything at all ? Paint crosshairs on a camera, take a picture, and you can prove you outsmarted that wise old buck without ending the life of the animal.
> 
> ...


Well let me see here. I know you understand what I am talking about. You are not being honest with your self. Like I said you have to be honest with yourself and post with honest answers, or put up a false front for some reason. My feeling is my relation to QDM and your dislike for most who are associated with QDM is probably the reason for your snide answers to the questions, or the following quote is nothing but BS. 


traditional said:


> Deer hunting was a very big part of my life. Unfortunately, life happens. The most important reason I hunted was for the camaraderie. Enjoying nature and sharing it with good friends.


----------

