# Poll: Tagging BBs as Bucks



## weatherby (Mar 26, 2001)

It would be a good idea , but most people who would shoot a button buck would rather let it lay if they had to tag it as a buck


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

I voted YES. If you pull the trigger be prepared to tag what ever you're shooting at. Otherwise you have no business shooting. Why even shoot at a deer as small as bambi to begin with? No need to even get into the button buck situation. Just concentrate on adult does and bucks. If you can't tell the difference switch to the game of golf and leave the woods to responsible hunters.


----------



## Michigan Mike (May 21, 2004)

I voted Yes, but I don't think it would matter much with these
combo licenses and basically unlimited doe tags there are nowadays.
I'd like to see the return of 1 license and doe tags per loterry only
and see the return of some better hunting like it used to be.
Just my 2cents and probably another poll. lol!

Mike


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Hamilton Reef said:


> ...Why even shoot at a deer as small as bambi to begin with? ...and leave the woods to responsible hunters.


Couple of reasons. Because the meat is very tender and during a bad winter they have less of a chance to survive than a mature deer.

I vote no! What my choice is (which just for me would be yes) but my choice should not be made mandatory of others when there is no biological reason for it.

There would be major enforcement problems with changing it to mandatory not only with hunters but with judges. The laws need to be made more simple, not more complicated, to provide a minority of what they want. Unfortuantley, a minority of hunters get laws changed and fragmented just to please that minority by going to their legislator who in most cases, not all, have no idea what hunting is all about. Case in point, doves!


----------



## Lil' Tanker (Jan 9, 2002)

Because a fawn has less of a chance to make it through the winter it should be shot. I have a hard time with that one.
There is only one way to be sure a fawn can't make it through winter- kill it before it has a chance. :sad:


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

QDM 4sure said:


> If everyone was honest,Yes a buck is a buck.I think it should be tag as one.Then again everyone is not that is why it can not be.There is no doubt that alot of those so called good sumaritains would not want to put there buck tags on such.
> The way to take care of the situation is,dont shoot nub bucks and only sell one buck tag in the state of Michigan.
> Question for you,if a man has a small ***** is he tagged as a woman.??//



Problem with that is it is not a "doe" tag it is an "antlerless" tag

AW


----------



## goosecaller (Nov 3, 2005)

Yes, a buck is a buck. Maybe people would start letting these things grow up a little.


----------



## jimmyboy (Jan 10, 2002)

Lil' Tanker said:


> Because a fawn has less of a chance to make it through the winter it should be shot. I have a hard time with that one.
> There is only one way to be sure a fawn can't make it through winter- kill it before it has a chance. :sad:


  Kill'em ALL and eliminate starvation


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

I voted 'Yes'.......use a buck tag if you kill a male fawn.

And, yes, I agree that there will be more deer left to rot. So be it. Regrettable as it is, it is a price to be paid. 

The important fact is: _More_ male fawns will survive than do now. And, THAT, is a good thing.


----------



## bentduck (Aug 19, 2003)

weatherby said:


> It would be a good idea , but most people who would shoot a button buck would rather let it lay if they had to tag it as a buck


Only a POACHER would let a button buck rot in the woods as opposed to putting a legal buck tag on it, so what you are saying here is that most hunters are poachers! 

If we continue to make game laws based on how the OUTLAWS react, then we are going out the world backwards. As far as BB mortality being a valid reason to appose this game law... that is a weak argument because in the southern part of the state where "most" of the deer live (according to the DNR) they simply don't die off in any significant numbers. (Upper Lower & U.P. are a little different so they maybe should be managed differently.) This is not rocket science ... somebody has got to say enough is enough!

It drives me crazy when I hear the argument about Bubba leaving a deer in the woods to rot in an effort to avoid following the law...How much sense does that make????


----------



## bentduck (Aug 19, 2003)

One more point that seems to be lost here. This is a SLAM DUNK as far as what the hunters want in this state. Poll after poll has shown this to be an extremely popular game law if implemented, yet because the DNR does not like it (for whatever reason), we end up with DNR apologists defending them for the most lame reasons I have ever heard.

If the DNR wants to continue ignoring hunter input on something this popular, I hold out no hope that any of the public meetings on deer management are legit. I am quite sure that they have already made up their minds on all things deer management related, and the meetings are nothing more than smoke and mirrors to appease the public.

Bitter?? Yup' this whole issue underscores what is wrong with the DNR as an organization. I do believe they have plenty of conciencious employees within their ranks but the system is too political to work as it should. Just like the NRC... the system is broken :sad: 

OK you can let me have it now


----------



## Youper (Jul 8, 2001)

The others that I hunt with do not favor the change allowing hunters to tag button bucks with Antler tags. They see this change as just giving hunters with antlerless tags one or two more antlerless tags.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

bentduck said:


> One more point that seems to be lost here. This is a SLAM DUNK as far as what the hunters want in this state. Poll after poll has shown this to be an extremely popular game law if implemented, yet because the DNR does not like it (for whatever reason), we end up with DNR apologists defending them for the most lame reasons I have ever heard.
> and mirrors to appease the public.


Please show us a link to a scientificially conducted poll on this subject. Polls on this message board or any other may be fun, but are 100% worthless. As it has been stated, there is no biological reason to consider this change. How many other states have such a rule, how many have tried it and dropped it ?
L & O


----------



## bentduck (Aug 19, 2003)

Liver and Onions said:


> Please show us a link to a scientificially conducted poll on this subject. Polls on this message board or any other may be fun, but are 100% worthless. As it has been stated, there is no biological reason to consider this change. How many other states have such a rule, how many have tried it and dropped it ?
> L & O


Talk to 8 out ten hunters and they will support this game law. You may think their opinions are "worthless" just like the DNR but I disagree with you and them. You don't need a "scientific poll" to determine the obvious, and there is no scientific or biological reason not to implement this law. Even on this thread which publicly leans way left we still find around 80% support the law privately out of the public eye. To me that is encouraging. 

The more important question is this. What harm would this new law do?? Make people think before shooting?? This would NOT MAKE SHOOTING A BB ILLEGAL. It just changes the tag structure a little. Don't tell me this is something far fetched because we already have antler restriction laws and laws that protect specific types of waterfowl and hen turkeys and pheasants. We make hunters think before they shoot in other hunting situations without the benefit of two "get out of jail free cards (buck tags) like deer hunters have. 

Spin it all you want but the law would increase the number of bucks that live to see 1 1/2 and beyond and I think that is a good thing!


----------



## huntingfool43 (Mar 16, 2002)

Looks like to me a lot of you better read your kill tags. There is no such thing as a BUCK tag or DOE TAG. There is antlered and antlerless and both ask for sex of the deer. You guys are tring to say you can pick out buttons at 100 plus yards, yea right. Sounds more like the bow hunters tring to gain more grond buy punishing a gun hunter if he makes a mistake. Maybe they should pass a law that when you criple a buck with your bow you cut up your tag, just think how many bucks that would save.


----------



## FinFeather'n'Fur (Dec 23, 2005)

Yes it is a a fine idea. I think most of use try and let the bb go, sometime people make mistakes, but still tag it, they tast great anyways.

"Maybe they should pass a law that when you criple a buck with your bow you cut up your tag, just think how many bucks that would save."

I know that gun hunters never wound a deer...I mean that would never happen cause when they put the gun away the year before it was shooting fine, and they havent messed with it since.. and they didnt get any worse at shooting over the summer. You may not be able to pick bb at 100, but you can tell yearlings, so dont shoot either


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

_"Sounds more like the bow hunters tring to gain more grond buy punishing a gun hunter if he makes a mistake. Maybe they should pass a law that when you criple a buck with your bow you cut up your tag, just think how many bucks that would save."_ 


Bowhunters vs. Firearms hunters has *NOTHING *to do with either the posting of this poll in this forum or the suggested "regulation" itself. The purpose of this poll in here is to generate discussion and get a feel for how the members of MS who choose to take part feel about the tagging of BBs as a buck. 

Yes, I know there is no such thing as a "buck tag", but it is a term used for ease of understanding.

Damn! Why do these threads HAVE to sink into US vs. THEM!....ME vs. THEM.....ME vs. YOU contests that only serve to divide as has been seen in the last few posts in here.


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

huntingfool43 said:


> ....You guys are tring to say you can pick out buttons at 100 plus yards, yea right....


That's what binoculars are for. Worse case, crank up your scope and look. Most buttons' heads are shaped totally different than a female fawn - more boxy, or square looking. Also, if there are a group of deer coming in, you can just about bet that the first one in is a button.


----------



## bentduck (Aug 19, 2003)

huntingfool43 said:


> Looks like to me a lot of you better read your kill tags. There is no such thing as a BUCK tag or DOE TAG. There is antlered and antlerless and both ask for sex of the deer. You guys are tring to say you can pick out buttons at 100 plus yards, yea right. Sounds more like the bow hunters tring to gain more grond buy punishing a gun hunter if he makes a mistake. Maybe they should pass a law that when you criple a buck with your bow you cut up your tag, just think how many bucks that would save.


Go ahead and shoot a button at 100 yards and then put a buck tag on it. Whats the problem???


----------



## caznik (Jun 3, 2002)

Well I voted no, but thinking about it after awhile I must say YES. Sarah C and I process alot of deer every year and we get in some button bucks to process and we just dont understand why someone would go out and shoot a small deer and pay the $60.00 we charge per deer. You should here some of the guys try to see if I would charge them less because they shot such a small deer. I just allways tell those guys if you like to shot bambie you will pay for it like everyone else does. The way I see it, if some one like to shot a button buck they must have to use both there buck tags and be done hunting for the rest of the year. These deer are easy to tell apart. For one thing they are small. Who ever likes to kill small deer anyways must allways think if its brown its down. So if you cannot be for sure that it isn't a button buck dont shot it. 

Caznik


----------

