# NW 13 Big Bucks



## goodworkstractors

Munsterlndr said:


> Possible, if that's the case then no need for mandatory restrictions, right?


Just because more people know the right thing to do, doesn't mean we shouldn't make it official


----------



## bheary

We need to do whatever it takes to keep Michigan hunters from going to ohio. I hate the fact that some fellow hunters go down south to spend money. Go Blue!!! Haha. Seriously though Michigan could easily take over as a big buck mecca


----------



## Munsterlndr

Steve said:


> Won't work where you have tons of public land in the mix.


Yet a bunch of the nice bucks harvested this year in non-APR NM DMU's were taken on public land, which would seem to contradict your claim.


----------



## Smokin-the-eyes

Overall its alot safer hunting in the apr zone i hunt tuscola county where everyone has a pocketfull of doetags and no aprs these guys r shooting at everything that moves atleast with aprs u gotta make sure its not a sublegal buck which in my mind i think there will be less wounded deer also cause u cant take these stupid long shots at the first site of brown it makes u evaluate your target before u shoot


----------



## stickbow shooter

It's possible that last year's snow helped save some bucks from hanging on the pole . A bunch of camps left by the second day by us. Or maybe they left because they had to go back to work on Monday. But in the Apr county's, it's working like it said it would. I for one am happy to see bigger/older bucks.


----------



## brushbuster

Munsterlndr said:


> Possible, if that's the case then no need for mandatory restrictions, right?


It really makes me wonder though how many more we would see if there were lp wide restrictions. it's a no brainer people, protect a large percentage of the yearling buck harvest and more people will see and shoot an older age class buck.


----------



## Steve

brushbuster said:


> It really makes me wonder though how many more we would see if there were lp wide restrictions. it's a no brainer people, protect a large percentage of the yearling buck harvest and more people will see and shoot an older age class buck.


Yeah the logic isn't too hard.


----------



## Munsterlndr

cscott711 said:


> Just because more people know the right thing to do, doesn't mean we shouldn't make it official


Or maybe there are some other underlying causes such as availability of food, etc. 

APR's may well make a difference or they may not. My point is simply that people pointing to pictures posted on social media as"proof" that APR's are working or saying that "results don't lie" is contradicted by similar pictures coming out of non-APR counties. The fact is that none of us really know what the driving force is behind the apparent increase in the number of older bucks taken throughout Michigan is this year and it's simplistic to just point to the bucks harvested in APR counties, while ignoring those posted in the non-APR counties, as well.


----------



## gonorth

My buddy shot this buck last night state land lake county 4:00 pm. No private land in the area.


----------



## Munsterlndr

brushbuster said:


> It really makes me wonder though how many more we would see if there were lp wide restrictions. it's a no brainer people, protect a large percentage of the yearling buck harvest and more people will see and shoot an older age class buck.


So again, what's your explanation for the big deer coming out of the NE side of the LP? Is it the hunters choice restrictions? Voluntary restraint? or some other factor at play?


----------



## gonorth




----------



## goodworkstractors

Munsterlndr said:


> Or maybe there are some other underlying causes such as availability of food, etc.
> 
> APR's may well make a difference or they may not. My point is simply that people pointing to pictures posted on social media as"proof" that APR's are working or saying that "results don't lie" is contradicted by similar pictures coming out of non-APR counties. The fact is that none of us really know what the driving force is behind the apparent increase in the number of older bucks taken throughout Michigan is this year and it's simplistic to just point to the bucks harvested in APR counties, while ignoring those posted in the non-APR counties, as well.


I understand, but none of this is scientific. Maybe just more people are posting pictures of deer they shoot this year? However, driving forces causing similar changes statewide are rooted in something beyond the amount of corn that was standing one season to the next. Weather, human (hunter) behavior, etc.


----------



## sureshot006

After extremely crappy hunting for 5 yrs we had our best numbers AND rack size season since hunting the NELP property in 1988. Not NW 13 or southern MI. I think it is a statewide thing likely based on environment or maybe how early fawns were born 2.5-3.5 yrs ago.


----------



## Munsterlndr

cscott711 said:


> I understand, but none of this is scientific. Maybe just more people are posting pictures of deer they shoot this year? However, driving forces causing similar changes statewide are rooted in something beyond the amount of corn that was standing one season to the next. Weather, human (hunter) behavior, etc.


I think you may be right about the number of people posting pics to social media being a factor, that certainly could play a role in forging peoples perceptions. 

My only point is that such pictures are being posted from counties throughout the state, not only from the NW13 and as a result, it's hard for me to accept mandatory regulations as being the primary driving force behind the apparent increase in older bucks being posted.


----------



## Smokin-the-eyes

We all know aprs will work i know it u know it and your grandma knows it 
It creates a bumper crop of bucks
Evens out buck to doe ratio
Increased rut activity
Raises age structure of bucks and does
Makes a safer hunting environment
Keeps more hunters in the state 
Increasing tourist money in a part of the state that really needs it

And u only have to pass on probably 50% of yearling bucks 
Only other negative is disease which we can handle when that problem comes along 


So lets do this thing in the whole lower exept the tb zone which i feel they should keep hunters choice


----------



## TJD

Munsterlndr said:


> I think you may be right about the number of people posting pics to social media being a factor, that certainly could play a role in forging peoples perceptions.
> 
> My only point is that such pictures are being posted from counties throughout the state, not only from the NW13 and as a result, it's hard for me to accept mandatory regulations as being the primary driving force behind the apparent increase in older bucks being posted.


----------



## Steve

Munsterlndr said:


> Or maybe there are some other underlying causes such as availability of food, etc.
> 
> APR's may well make a difference or they may not. My point is simply that people pointing to pictures posted on social media as"proof" that APR's are working or saying that "results don't lie" is contradicted by similar pictures coming out of non-APR counties. The fact is that none of us really know what the driving force is behind the apparent increase in the number of older bucks taken throughout Michigan is this year and it's simplistic to just point to the bucks harvested in APR counties, while ignoring those posted in the non-APR counties, as well.


It's a simple fact that if you don't shoot immature bucks they have the chance to be mature the next year. The corollary is also true, if you shoot immature bucks - they have no chance to be mature next year.


----------



## Munsterlndr

Smokin-the-eyes said:


> We all know aprs will work i know it u know it and your grandma knows it
> It creates a bumper crop of bucks
> Evens out buck to doe ratio
> Increased rut activity
> Raises age structure of bucks and does
> Makes a safer hunting environment
> Keeps more hunters in the state
> Increasing tourist money in a part of the state that really needs it
> 
> And u only have to pass on probably 50% of yearling bucks
> Only other negative is disease which we can handle when that problem comes along
> 
> 
> So lets do this thing in the whole lower exept the tb zone which i feel they should keep hunters choice


Well it sounds like you're convinced. LoL.

Tell us how APR's balance out the buck-doe ratio? Do you want to share some statistics showing that APR's have had an impact on reducing hunting accidents? Any data on keeping hunters in the state or increasing tourism or are those just baseless claims? How do APR's increase the age structure or does?

Lot's of claims made in your post, no evidence to support most of them.


----------



## >WingIt<

Munsterlndr said:


> Or maybe there are some other underlying causes such as availability of food, etc.
> 
> APR's may well make a difference or they may not. My point is simply that people pointing to pictures posted on social media as"proof" that APR's are working or saying that "results don't lie" is contradicted by similar pictures coming out of non-APR counties. The fact is that none of us really know what the driving force is behind the apparent increase in the number of older bucks taken throughout Michigan is this year and it's simplistic to just point to the bucks harvested in APR counties, while ignoring those posted in the non-APR counties, as well.


Yup no way APRs have made any difference in the amount older bucks being seen and taken. It's all a conspiracy. All the people posting trail cam pics of large bucks, shooting large bucks, and letting others see there success are part of the Deer hunter illuminati.


----------



## mbrewer

stickbow shooter said:


> I have a different reason for them to make the rest of the lower fall under Apr's, to spread out the hunting pressure. Hunting public land in the lower is not fun anymore.


I don't understand how your suggestion will spread out the public land hunting pressure.


Munsterlndr said:


> If you look on MI buckpole, as you suggested, you will see that there are also a bunch of nice bucks being posted from all of the non-APR counties in Northern Michigan this year, which would certainly raise the possibility that there are other factors besides APR's that are the driving force behind what is apparently a bumper year for rack production across the state.


Rack production and age are two separate issues. 

Clearly other factors exist, they always do. To award the unknown special recognition isn't proper or necessary. How old is the question, not how big.

Success breeds confidence. If guys are taking confidence to the field based on others success or from pictures, good for them, I hope it lasts. But, anyone who get's worked up over one season is liable to get worked over by the next.


----------



## Munsterlndr

Steve said:


> It's a simple fact that if you don't shoot immature bucks they have the chance to be mature the next year. The corollary is also true, if you shoot immature bucks - they have no chance to be mature next year.


Yes, that's a fact. Well sort of, as there are other sources of mortality that yearling bucks are subjected to besides being shot but putting that aside, your "fact" does nothing to explain the reason for the apparent increase in the number of pictures of older/larger bucks being posted from non-APR counties. I know, I know, you don't hunt in non-APR counties so you don't want to speculate about them......


----------



## Munsterlndr

>WingIt< said:


> Yup no way APRs have made any difference in the amount older bucks being seen and taken. It's all a conspiracy. All the people posting trail cam pics of large bucks, shooting large bucks, and letting others see there success are part of the Deer hunter illuminati.


Except that's not what I said, is it? I said APR's may well have had an impact but that pictures posted on social media are not compelling evidence, as there are pictures of some really nice bucks being posted from non-APR counties, as well. So why do you think that there are bigger bucks coming out of non-APR counties this year?


----------



## >WingIt<

Munsterlndr said:


> Yes, that's a fact. Well sort of, as there are other sources of mortality that yearling bucks are subjected to besides being shot but putting that aside, your "fact" does nothing to explain the reason for the apparent increase in the number of pictures of older/larger bucks being posted from non-APR counties. I know, I know, you don't hunt in non-APR counties so you don't want to speculate about them......


Well you have said that you have seen 5 deer all year on your private piece in central leelanua. Does this qualify you to make judgements if APRs are working or not. You seem to be a strong proponent of the latter. Branch out and see what a lot of others are seeing. This upswing is no coincidence


----------



## stickbow shooter

brewer , This year we have had more hunting pressure than in the previous years here. I talked with a few guy's and some said they came here hoping to get a crack at a bigger buck. Maybe if the whole state adopts it. They will go back to hunting where they use to


----------



## >WingIt<

Munsterlndr said:


> Except that's not what I said, is it? I said APR's may well have had an impact but that pictures posted on social media are not compelling evidence, as there are pictures of some really nice bucks being posted from non-APR counties, as well. So why do you think that there are bigger bucks coming out of non-APR counties this year?


I'm not concerned with that part of the state. I don't live or hunt there. I'm concerned with the 13. You are falling and its apparent you are grasping for anything you can at this point and starting to get irrational. It's really getting funny


----------



## brushbuster

Munsterlndr said:


> So again, what's your explanation for the big deer coming out of the NE side of the LP? Is it the hunters choice restrictions? Voluntary restraint? or some other factor at play?


Outliers? Lol


----------



## Munsterlndr

>WingIt< said:


> Well you have said that you have seen 5 deer all year on your private piece in central leelanua. Does this qualify you to make judgements if APRs are working or not. You seem to be a strong proponent of the latter. Branch out and see what a lot of others are seeing. This upswing is no coincidence


Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The fact that I've hunted under mandatory APR's in one of the NW13 counties for over 10 years certainly gives me some perspective on their impact, as well as owning property and hunting in two other of the NW12 counties. You don't seem to want to comment on the "upswing" in older bucks taken in the non-APR northern Michigan counties, what is that upswing due to?


----------



## DirtySteve

wannabapro said:


> Leave it this way for 3 more years then go to a one buck only rule.



I can understand how APR'S could make a hunting experience better for everyone. But a 1 buck rule would be awful. Why make the experience worse? I don't want to shoot a deer with my bow and be done for the yr.


----------



## Munsterlndr

brushbuster said:


> Outliers? Lol


Hell of a lot of outliers. So the bucks pictured from the NW13 are directly due to mandatory APR's but the ones from other counties are outliers? That's what you want to go with?


----------



## wannabapro

DirtySteve said:


> I can understand how APR'S could make a hunting experience better for everyone. But a 1 buck rule would be awful. Why make the experience worse? I don't want to shoot a deer with my bow and be done for the yr.


Make it a wall-hanger. Then hunt does if you need more freezer meat.


----------



## brushbuster

Munsterlndr said:


> Hell of a lot of outliers. So the bucks pictured from the NW13 are directly due to mandatory APR's but the ones from other counties are outliers? That's what you want to go with?


It was a joke. I don't take this stuff too serious anymore. Could be a number of reasons we will just have to wait and see what the data says and compare nw13 harvest results with rest of the NLP.


----------



## Munsterlndr

>WingIt< said:


> I'm not concerned with that part of the state. I don't live or hunt there. I'm concerned with the 13. You are falling and its apparent you are grasping for anything you can at this point and starting to get irrational. It's really getting funny


So the answer is just to ignore the pictures of buck being harvested outside of the NW13, that contradict the idea that mandatory APR's are the driving force and launch personal attacks against anyone who raises any questions about them. Nice.


----------



## DirtySteve

wannabapro said:


> Make it a wall-hanger. Then hunt does if you need more freezer meat.



I hunt public land and doe tags in the areas I hunt aren't really an option. I haven't been drawn in 5 yrs.


----------



## mbrewer

stickbow shooter said:


> brewer , This year we have had more hunting pressure than in the previous years here. I talked with a few guy's and some said they came here hoping to get a crack at a bigger buck. Maybe if the whole state adopts it. They will go back to hunting where they use to


Ok thanks. I misunderstood the intent of your public land reference. It seemed you were implying that an already over-pressured situation down south would be improved by adding more.


----------



## Hillsdales Most Wanted

stickbow shooter said:


> brewer , This year we have had more hunting pressure than in the previous years here. I talked with a few guy's and some said they came here hoping to get a crack at a bigger buck. Maybe if the whole state adopts it. They will go back to hunting where they use to


If i were looking for state land to hunt i would head right for the NW13, with all the talk of bigger bucks in this area i can definitely see hunting camps/groups migrating that way.


----------



## brushbuster

I can just go with what I know....
APR's are designed to increase the buck age structure by limiting the yearling buck harvest.
Data has showed us that it does do that.


----------



## brushbuster

I can just go with what I know....
APR's are designed to increase the buck age structure by limiting the yearling buck harvest.
Data has showed us that it does do that.


----------



## dialed-in

Munsterlndr said:


> Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The fact that I've hunted under mandatory APR's in one of the NW13 counties for over 10 years certainly gives me some perspective on their impact, as well as owning property and hunting in two other of the NW12 counties. You don't seem to want to comment on the "upswing" in older bucks taken in the non-APR northern Michigan counties, what is that upswing due to?


Any proof of this upswing you speak of, in non apr northern counties? Or are you just a pot? You seem to think no one else has credibility but yourself...


----------



## wibowhunter

I, for one, couldn't care less about why there are bigger bucks, I'm just happy to be able to share pics with friends from other states of bucks that aren't 1.5yr old forkhorns and get laughed at.


----------



## Hillsdales Most Wanted

dialed-in said:


> Any proof of this upswing you speak of, in non apr northern counties? Or are you just a pot? You seem to think no one else has credibility but yourself...


Cant believe im saying this but i agree with Munster, alot of big bucks being taking all over the state, yes apr is helping but there must be other reasons. I really feel many hunters have experienced such horrible hunting that they have searched for answers. It wasnt that long ago habitat, deer beds, scent control, low hunting pressure wasnt talked about very much. All of these things are no longer secrets (thanks to many guys on this site). So i say bigger bucks across the state is due to more knowledgeable hunters


----------



## NorthWoodsHunter

I would imagine the corn harvest has something to do with the statewide success this year. Lots of standing corn protected a lot of deer last year. This years weather meant the corn was down most places leading to less hiding spots for those deer that were "protected". This doesn't explain the northern mi guys hunting big woods kit near AG fields.


----------



## uppower

A


----------



## Munsterlndr

NorthWoodsHunter said:


> There have always been nice deer shot in the southern part of the state. That hasn't changed. Northern Michigan is not known for big bucks yet this year some incredible deer have been shot. Coincidentally the year that the first round of APR protected deer hit 3.5. You can beat the anti APR drum all you want because you don't like the government telling you what to do but the results speak for themselves.


Sure there have always been nice deer shot in the southern part of the state, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about counties in the NLP, like Cheboygan, Otsego, Crawford, Roscommon, etc, which border the NW13 and which have also seen an apparent increase in the number of nice bucks posted on social media, so if the results speak for themselves, what is the driving force behind the older bucks being harvested in the NLP, outside of the NW13?


----------



## boomer_x7

Heres what i know..... I hunt only public land in the APR zone. There is no doubt APR's are working. Its not something else, It's APR's!!! Food this year (acorns) is/was scarce. Yet myself and others in the area have by far the most bigger/older deer on camera and in freezers that we have ever seen! AG feilds are not local either. There is no doubt in my mind APR's are working and doing exactly what they are suppose to. Most people i talk to, ( i do talk to many people that hunt the same area that are from all over michigan) are excited by what they see. Most this year did NOT shoot a buck at all, but everyone seemed pleased to at least see deer and young bucks, along with all the extra sign!


----------



## boomer_x7

Munsterlndr said:


> Sure there have always been nice deer shot in the southern part of the state, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about counties in the NLP, like Cheboygan, Otsego, Crawford, Roscommon, etc, which border the NW13 and which have also seen an apparent increase in the number of nice bucks posted on social media, so if the results speak for themselves, what is the driving force behind the older bucks being harvested in the NLP, outside of the NW13?


Are large fish only caught in one hole? Or do they travel to surrounding water?


----------



## hypox

Deer don't know where the county lines are.


----------



## bignuge

Munsterlndr said:


> Again nobody said APR's are not working. What is your explanation for the Older deer=bigger racks and bodies pics coming out of counties like Cheboygan and Roscommon? Are you suggesting that APR's are also responsible for those pics?


Nice deer have been shot in every county in the state. It would be nice to do a tally of all the entries to mi buckpole from the Apr area vs 13 non apr counties to see if what you are saying is true. I do know that the deer being taken are older and that means people aren't shooting them at 1.5 years old. It would be nice to see the deer buck boom mentality die in this state!


----------



## Chevyguy28

I hunt in the southeastern part of the state, as a personal preference and "I'm not shooting anything back here and dragging it out unless it's worth it mentality" I have seen better bucks on the small 40acres I hunt. Last year I seen 2 nice bucks, this year I seen 8. My idea of nice bucks is a buck with 4 points on one side or more. No one mandates me to do this but MYSELF. Partly because I do favor APRs into play as well as the mentality that I just described. I pass on every spike, 4,6 pt I see unless I have enough time for a quick picture. I enjoy seeing bigger deer on the property and would like to believe that the neighboring property's are passing on smaller bucks, but I will not push my agenda onto them by no means.

I am for APRs in the southern counties, this is my opinion. I have no data to back this up, I have no statistics, I have only tree stand time and a handful of trailcam pics from last year to this year with bigger deer on it. For that I am pleased, I will continue to monitor the deer that pass through the property and pass on the smaller bucks in hopes that one day they will pass back by as a much larger antlered animal.


----------



## Munsterlndr

hypox said:


> Deer don't know where the county lines are.


So mass migrations of older bucks from inside the NW13 to outside the NW13 is your theory? Would not the same be true with sub-legal bucks from within the NW13 wandering across the county line and getting whacked, reducing the number of bucks that survive to get older in the NW13? Or is it a one way kind of thing?


----------



## boomer_x7

Munsterlndr said:


> So mass migrations of older bucks from inside the NW13 to outside the NW13 is your theory? Would not the same be true with sub-legal bucks from within the NW13 wandering across the county line and getting whacked, reducing the number of bucks that survive to get older in the NW13? Or is it a one way kind of thing?


Is there a shortage of young buck pictures from those surrounding counties you speak of???? There is no doubt deer that cross the county lines.

Where is that "mass' amount of big bucks being shot in these surrounding counties?


----------



## Rasputin

I hunt oceana county. No aprs. We have seen more bigger/older bucks than ever this year. I would post the 2 8 points we put on the pole last week, but I don't know how to post a pic. One was aged at 3.5, the other at 2.5. And we know that there are at least 2 more bigger and older.


----------



## Munsterlndr

bignuge said:


> Nice deer have been shot in every county in the state. It would be nice to do a tally of all the entries to mi buckpole from the Apr area vs 13 non apr counties to see if what you are saying is true. I do know that the deer being taken are older and that means people aren't shooting them at 1.5 years old. It would be nice to see the deer buck boom mentality die in this state!


Again, hardly scientific but certainly interesting. 

So if we compare all of the 2015 entries from the NW13 counties to all of the 2015 entries from 13 NLP counties that have no APR's and are fully in the Northern Rifle zone (excluding the NELP counties that have hunters choice) where the boom buck mentality is not curbed by any restrictions, it's an interesting comparison.

NW13 Counties - 1,304 entries
non APR 13 - 1,682 entries

Those are simply bucks entered, no way to tell their age or size just from the numbers provided. In looking at the pics from both APR and non-APR counties, both seem to have what would be perceived to be an unusual number of older bucks with larger antlers.


----------



## hypox

I imagine there is more support for QDM than ever. Along with that, people close to county lines are probably buying in to it even more than the status quo. It's like living next to a neighbor with a ton of property that practices QDM. If hunters know the neighbors are passing smaller deer, they are more likely to practice some sort of restraint.


----------



## Munsterlndr

hypox said:


> I imagine there is more support for QDM than ever. Along with that, people close to county lines are probably buying in to it even more than the status quo. It's like living next to a neighbor with a ton of property that practices QDM. If hunters know the neighbors are passing smaller deer, they are more likely to practice some sort of restraint.


Yeah, that must be it.


----------



## hypox

QDM in Michigan is going viral!


----------



## fishx65

I understand why lots of these posts are about huge bucks being taken in the NW12 but I think the main goal of APRs in these areas was to have lots of decent 2 1/2 year old bucks running around. The success of APRs in the NW12 should be judged by the NUMBER of happy hunters that take a decent buck home not rack measurements.


----------



## 96215

It's not just the NW Lower that's seeing more big bucks. In the last 3 - 4 years I've seen more of them in the Jackson and Hillsdale areas since the early 80's. And more this year than the previous three.
It has nothing to do with food, winter, the price of tea in China, or anything environmental. It is because more and more people are letting the young ones walk.
If somone is against APR's or QDM because they like the way things have been I respect that. That is a perfectly legitimate reason. But let's be honest about it. The reason there are more big ones than before is because more people are passing on young bucks. Period!!!!


----------



## 357Maximum

Jamorris said:


> It's not just the NW Lower that's seeing more big bucks. In the last 3 - 4 years I've seen more of them in the Jackson and Hillsdale areas ,since the early 80's


It's not just Jackson and Hillsdale Co's ... It is happening in Montcalm, Gratiot, and Clinton too. With education,information and recommendations plus a little positive feedback certain things do not need to be LAW to work in certain areas. It is nice that it does not need to be law here. A guy that wants to shoot whatever he wants to shoot can, and no one is being deprived of how they want to do things. I have made it to point in my hunting career that I feel it's in my best interest to pass a buck that may be a GOOD ONE someday...does not mean the next guy feels that way. What about the first timer just trying to put a buck on the ground...should my experience deprive him of that?? I think not. 

When I get upset is when someone 150 miles away wants to tell everyone else what they should do and then goes out of his way to make it a blanket law. That would be like me telling guys in the Carolina's what "the right thing to do for them" is. It's kinda like wiping before you poop...just do not make no sense.


----------



## 357Maximum

hypox said:


> QDM in Michigan is going viral!



I am not disagreeing with you, but

If it is going viral by itself, why do so many feel the need to push it into statewide law then?


----------



## hypox

Isn't a blanket law what we used to have?

It seems logical that Michigan would have different laws for the different areas/habitat wouldn't it? I mean, does it really make sense for Jackson county to have the same laws as Lake county and the same laws as most any county in the U.P.?

And really, what's wrong with areas to have different options? Don't some states or Canada have large bow only areas? I'd love to hunt a bow only area but don't want to spent thousands of dollars for the experience. Why can't Michigan knock off a decent size of public land that can be bow only so I can experience that for just tags and travel?


----------



## cdacker

Munsterlndr said:


> Because that "proof" is being used in an agenda driven campaign to convince potential survey recipients of the effectiveness of the APR's, regardless of whether they have personally experienced any benefits from that regulations. If people pushing agendas are going to use social media pictures to influence the outcome of the survey, it's reasonable to question the validity of what they are offering as proof, no?


Fair enough. You see an agenda driven campaign. I see excited people. Do you believe the regulation is working as intended?


----------



## 357Maximum

cdacker said:


> Fair enough. You see an agenda driven campaign. I see excited people. Do you believe the regulation is working as intended?



I hope it's working. Because I am betting there is going to be a lot more hunters up there next year.


----------



## Munsterlndr

cdacker said:


> Fair enough. You see an agenda driven campaign. I see excited people. Do you believe the regulation is working as intended?


When you see statements from Bio like this, how can you view his attempts to influence opinions as anything but an agenda driven campaign?



Bioactive said:


> the only reason you have the APRs you are enjoying is because activists like me from all over the state wanted something better for our state, and activists inside your area made it happen. Just as those activists used the fantastic results from LeelanauCounty to spread the effort to the NW 12, activists are now going to use the fantastic NW 12 data to spread the word to the rest of the state. The battle is not over yet and you need to think about your fellow hunters around the state who do not have what you have, then you might understand why people from outside your area dare to have an opinion about it. Provincial thinking is the last thing we need if we are going to improve hunting throughout our great state.
> 
> 
> Interesting how often we heard the term*"beating a dead horse"* back when many of us were fighting to get APRs instituted in the NW 12. In fact I just entered beating dead horse into the search box and got three pages of posts from this part of the forum alone. Most of that was directed towards beating the horse that got you your APRs. You should thank your lucky stars that the the horse called Leelanau County was beaten repeatedly, over and over and over until people started to grasp what was going on there and wanted it for your area. Just because you have seen the arguments before, does not mean everyone else has. The horse is not even close to being dead. It is a 2-year old just getting ready for its first race towards the end goal of winning the
> Triple Crown.
> 
> You can feel sorry for people that don't have what you have, or you can care enough about your fellow hunters who don't have it to help us rather than feeling sorry for us, and to recognize that when dealing with a constituency of over 600,000 hunters, the same story has to be repeated over and over and over again in order to combat the denial being laid out by those who oppose the great results you are enjoying.
> 
> Has it ever occurred to you how many thousands of silent lurkers there are on this site who might actually believe some of the nonsense being put out that things have not improved because of APRs in the NW 12?
> 
> Please help beat the horse.


When you see that kind of push, it transcends people making up their own mind, based on personal experience and becomes a campaign to mold public opinion. As mentioned before, social media can be a powerful tool in molding opinions and it's no accident that it's being employed in such a manner, in the hope that opinions will be influenced in an overwhelming manner to support the changed regulations. If it was just individuals being excited about it, that would be one thing but ongoing attempts to "sell" the regulations are a completely different thing. 

As far as whether the regulations are working as intended, I'm sure some younger bucks are being protected and that some older bucks are being harvested as a result. Whether reality is reflected by the claims being made by some on social media is another story.


----------



## bignuge

Munsterlndr said:


> Again, hardly scientific but certainly interesting.
> 
> So if we compare all of the 2015 entries from the NW13 counties to all of the 2015 entries from 13 NLP counties that have no APR's and are fully in the Northern Rifle zone (excluding the NELP counties that have hunters choice) where the boom buck mentality is not curbed by any restrictions, it's an interesting comparison.
> 
> NW13 Counties - 1,304 entries
> non APR 13 - 1,682 entries
> 
> Those are simply bucks entered, no way to tell their age or size just from the numbers provided. In looking at the pics from both APR and non-APR counties, both seem to have what would be perceived to be an unusual number of older bucks with larger antlers.



You can't just add the numbers in parentheses together. Those are total entries ever posted. A lot of those deer are from years past. You would also have to subtract the deer with less than 3 points on a side from the non apr total. That would make it apples to apples. 

I believe apr works better in the northern lower because the majority of the 1.5 year old deer are less than 3 points on a side. That is absolutely not the case in the southern lower. In essence, Apr of 3 points in the southern lower would be killing off a vast majority of the 1.5 deer leaving the spikes and 4 points which are a significantly lower % of the 1.5 year old deer in southern Michigan.


----------



## d_rek

Munsterlndr said:


> Hey Steve, I haven't disputed your personal experiences nor would I try to. I think that hearing directly from the troops on the ground offers valuable insight, both from those who have positive things to say and those who don't. Posting third party pictures from other social media sites and offering them as proof is what I am questioning. If those pictures are being offered as proof that the NW12 is working, in an attempt to influence peoples opinions, then it seems reasonable to offer up similar pics from non-APR counties as contradictory "proof". Apparently those are not welcome though and get deleted as being off-topic, despite them being relevant to the discussion of whether or not APR's are responsible for the increase in pictures of older bucks.........


But we're not asking for proof that bigger bucks are coming from non-APR counties. We're asking for proof that APRs are not working in the NW13. Which up to this point in time has not been provided, with exception to the small minority of posts on this forum, and in particular, this thread. 

You may not like third-party conjecture and social media pictures as the only 'proof' offered by APR supporters, but it's the best thing we have right now. 

Again, where is the proof to the contrary? Saying big bucks being taken in other counties is not proof to the contrary, nor does it make any sort of case against the effect of APRs in the NW13. All you are stating is that big bucks are being taken in other counties.


----------



## bucko12pt

kingfisher 11 said:


> What I find real funny is the stats based on facebook pictures! I can tell you a couple of things, If I shoot a big buck in the NW13 you won't see a picture or a story. I saw a big increase in hunter numbers this year. I don't want to add to it. Quite a bit more shooting than previous years. Many big bucks on trail cam than the previous years. Problem is these bigger bucks are more nocturnal and harder to see. As of the 22nd we still had 6 shooter bucks running around, all the pictures are after dark. We typically do better in Dec or the end of Nov.
> One observation I don't like is the lack of does. I think the people hunting our area have been shooting does to get meat since they had to pass on the smaller bucks. We had doe tags the last two years but we chose not shoot any. If you base ratios on our trail cam photos, we have a 3-1 ratio of bucks to does. Our county has a ton of does tags every year. problem is the western portion of the county has a lot more deer. I think they need to micro manage the units.
> To answer the question maybe more guys will stay home and not hunt out of state. I am on of them, I have stayed in MI the last two years. I guess this is for Munster since he does not agree with this, yes more guys will stay here if the bucks continue to mature. I have spent quite a few dollars in MI the last two years that normally would have gone to the midwest of Canada. The motel we stay at, the owner told me I am her best customer. She closed the motel down last Friday but said she will leave a room available for me the rest of the year. Saturday night I was the only person staying at the motel.


Agreed, I know of at least 20 bucks that anyone would consider a trophy (125" and up) that were harvested in the NW13 that haven't been posted on Facebook. 

A good indicator of the harvest is the numbers if bucks brought to taxidermists and some of those guys have twice the number of a normal year. I visit a few to measure CBM qualifiers and they have over twice the number of qualifiers this year over a normal year. 

Not very scientific, but still a good indicator.


----------



## Munsterlndr

bignuge said:


> You can't just add the numbers in parentheses together. Those are total entries ever posted. A lot of those deer are from years past. You would also have to subtract the deer with less than 3 points on a side from the non apr total. That would make it apples to apples.


The numbers I used were the totals for 2015 entries according to MIBUCKPOLE. 

In looking at the pics there were relatively few sub-3 pt bucks posted and why would that make it apples to apples when the APR counties include legal yearling bucks?

Again, this is a quick and dirty, non-scientific comparison, if you start to try and qualify each pic, it's going to be almost impossible to come up with any reasonable data.


----------



## Munsterlndr

d_rek said:


> But we're not asking for proof that bigger bucks are coming from non-APR counties. We're asking for proof that APRs are not working in the NW13. Which up to this point in time has not been provided, with exception to the small minority of posts on this forum, and in particular, this thread.
> 
> You may not like third-party conjecture and social media pictures as the only 'proof' offered by APR supporters, but it's the best thing we have right now.
> 
> Again, where is the proof to the contrary? Saying big bucks being taken in other counties is not proof to the contrary, nor does it make any sort of case against the effect of APRs in the NW13. All you are stating is that big bucks are being taken in other counties.


You may be asking for proof that APR's are not working but that's not what this conversation has been about. How would you suggest someone prove a negative?

Again, if you are accepting third party social media pics as proof that the APR's are working and it sounds like you are, then it's reasonable to ask why third party social media pics of big bucks from non-APR counties are not legitimate contradictory proof. Unless you can provide a reasonable explanation for why non-APR counties are producing similar pictures of large bucks, then it calls into question the validity of pointing to APR's as the reason for the big bucks harvested in APR counties.


----------



## d_rek

Munsterlndr said:


> You may be asking for proof that APR's are not working but that's not what this conversation has been about. How would you suggest someone prove a negative?
> 
> Again, if you are accepting third party social media pics as proof that the APR's are working and it sounds like you are, then it's reasonable to ask why third party social media pics of big bucks from non-APR counties are not legitimate contradictory proof. Unless you can provide a reasonable explanation for why non-APR counties are producing similar pictures of large bucks, then it calls into question the validity of pointing to APR's as the reason for the big bucks harvested in APR counties.


They are not legitimate contradictory proof because they are not representative of the counties we are discussing? The sample size for the sake of this argument is not the entire state of Michigan, it's the NW13. Or did I miss something along the way? 

Your argument is fallible and misleading: Big bucks are killed in non-APR counties, so therefore APRs are not the cause of big bucks being killed in APR counties. That's about the gist of it, right?

I don't think anyone has disputed that big bucks are being killed in non-APR counties. It's not even a question. It's a fact: Yes, big bucks get killed in non-APR counties year-after-year. But we are not discussing other counties we are discussing the NW13. Right? 

What we are arguing (or at least I thought we were) is if APRs are having the intended effect of altering age structure, resulting in bigger bucks with larger antlers, of the deer population in the NW13 counties. 

At what point did the conversation focus on other counties?


----------



## brushbuster

And to think people on here tried to tell us the nlp cant grow big bucks lol


----------



## beer and nuts

Bucko, you are saying that you know of 20 bucks all over 125!?!? Wow, amazing...I'm not sure I know 20 people that shot a buck! Seriously over 125. Believe me, not too many hunters in Missouri can say that either. How many people do you know that shot a buck in non-apr's, let alone over 125??


----------



## fishx65

Again, shouldn't the success of APRs in the NW12 be measured by the number of 3 on a side bucks taken and not antler size???? I thought APRs were all about having more 2 1/2 year old bucks available to the average hunter. Most NW12 hunters I know are thrilled to death with all the buck sign and legal buck sightings they have experienced this season. I myself was thrilled to see lots of 2 1/2 year old bucks running around this seaon and even more thrilled to arrow one of them.


----------



## brushbuster

Munsterlndr said:


> Sure there have always been nice deer shot in the southern part of the state, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about counties in the NLP, like Cheboygan, Otsego, Crawford, Roscommon, etc, which border the NW13 and which have also seen an apparent increase in the number of nice bucks posted on social media, so if the results speak for themselves, what is the driving force behind the older bucks being harvested in the NLP, outside of the NW13?


And to think those counties don't have good soil,and lots of ag land. Just goes to show that Michigan can produce some great bucks in the northern zone and with APRs in place even more will be produced.


----------



## Dadof2

Steve said:


> Munster perhaps you missed my post in the NW13 observations thread. My evidence that aprs are working in that region is not based on Facebook or social media but rather the many thousands of pictures my cameras take on public AND private land in that region. I go through all the pictures every year and stratify the deer by age class and the number of mature deer has gone up dramatically. This is despite the two harshest winters on record. I'm sure you will dispute my observations but they are certainly NOT based on social media. You will also say that based on social media the same is happening in non Apr counties but I don't have cameras there so I can't dispute your proof based on social media.


Amen Steve!


----------



## Munsterlndr

d_rek said:


> They are not legitimate contradictory proof because they are not representative of the counties we are discussing? The sample size for the sake of this argument is not the entire state of Michigan, it's the NW13. Or did I miss something along the way?
> 
> Your argument is fallible and misleading: Big bucks are killed in non-APR counties, so therefore APRs are not the cause of big bucks being killed in APR counties. That's about the gist of it, right?
> 
> I don't think anyone has disputed that big bucks are being killed in non-APR counties. It's not even a question. It's a fact: Yes, big bucks get killed in non-APR counties year-after-year. But we are not discussing other counties we are discussing the NW13. Right?
> 
> What we are arguing (or at least I thought we were) is if APRs are having the intended effect of altering age structure, resulting in bigger bucks with larger antlers, of the deer population in the NW13 counties.
> 
> At what point did the conversation focus on other counties?


What we are arguing is whether third party social media pictures of bucks harvested are attributable to APR's, as many have suggested. Similar pictures of large bucks from other NLP counties that don't have APR's would contradict that claim. As you point out, there have always been big bucks killed, both inside and outside the NW13 (although many APR supporters used to claim that the North was devoid of such deer). This year there seem to be greater numbers of big bucks posted on social media, both inside and outside of the NW13, yet some are willing to accept the ones from counties within the NW13 as proof positive that APR's are working. Do you honestly not see that contradiction?


----------



## 357Maximum

bucko12pt said:


> Agreed, I know of at least 20 bucks that anyone would consider a trophy (125" and up) that were harvested in the NW13 that haven't been posted on Facebook.
> 
> A good indicator of the harvest is the numbers if bucks brought to taxidermists and some of those guys have twice the number of a normal year. I visit a few to measure CBM qualifiers and they have over twice the number of qualifiers this year over a normal year.
> 
> Not very scientific, but still a good indicator.




20 over 125, WOW that's simply amazing. It would take a couple of years in the heart of ag land for me to compile a list like that. You got a lot of friends, good for you.

I cannot wait to read this years CBM report, salivating just thinking about it. 

I hope the local party stores up there have a lot of beer and cupcakes.


----------



## Lumberman

I can only speak for the folks I know and hunt with in the NW 13. 

The majority hunt and own property up there because that's were tradition draws us. Not because we think it's great hunting. 

My camp consists of around 20 guys that come and go and spread all over lake county on Public land. 

APRs was a mixed bag of approval when it first came out. 

After the last two season it's overwhelmingly supported. Not sure anyone would vote no this time. 

Now if it a some kind of fluke then maybe it will change but as of now it's an overwhelming success even for the most anti APR guys. We saw more 8pt plus bucks as a group this year then on the 10 years prior all combined.


----------



## Munsterlndr

brushbuster said:


> And to think people on here tried to tell us the nlp cant grow big bucks lol


Yeah, that's a great buck. Is it a product of APR's?

How about this one, a public land buck from Cheboygan County taken last week, is this one also a product of APR's?


----------



## brushbuster

With just 2 more years to go in the NW12 trial, people have to ask themselves, Can the NLP produce big antlered bucks? Well thanks to Michigan buck pole and the pictures that Munster has provided with big antlered bucks in the non APR zones here in zone 2 that answer is yes, yes they can.
Thanks munster for showing that not only the NW12 produces big bucks, but all of zone 2 can produce big bucks. The question remains do Michigan hunters want to see and shoot more of them?


----------



## ryan-b

My b


bioactive said:


> *This is the third season of APRs in the NW 12. * And this is the first year that it was possible to have 1.5 year olds that were spared the first year show up as 3.5 year olds.
> 
> Nothing wrong with expressing your opinion but you might want to base it on facts rather than your made up idea that APRs have been in place for only "one stinking year."
> 
> And perhaps you can translate this sentence for us so we can respond:
> 
> *"Thise buck aimoly survived the past 2-3 seasons and are still around."*


My bad didnt seem that long ago. 
Just a question. How do you feel about having a face to face conversation with a person who lets say only has thier father or grandfathers hand me down rifle. They dont make enough to buy a new bow or cross bow. They have a family that could really use the meat and they have no access to a place that offers antlerless tags during gun season. You mean to tell me you could look them straight in the eye, and tell them you cant shoot that legal deer because I want to see bigger antlers. Could you really do that? Id suggest maybe buying up as much land as possible that way you can have it your way.


----------



## Jager Pro

Munsterlndr said:


> If you look on MI buckpole, as you suggested, you will see that there are also a bunch of nice bucks being posted from all of the non-APR counties in Northern Michigan this year, which would certainly raise the possibility that there are other factors besides APR's that are the driving force behind what is apparently a bumper year for rack production across the state.


I know the Crystal Falls DNR is reporting a much higher age class of bucks being checked in and a noticeable lack of yearling bucks. It has been said multiple times that this is due to the early snow last year in the UP, idk how it affected the Northern Lower but it could be a factor.


----------



## JPWARD

I have lived in cheboygan county for the last 15 yrs and talk with dozens of hunters each year and any improvement is SLIGHT and likely based on some voluntary passing of small bucks. If we are waiting for voluntary passing to have an effect for the masses then we will have to wait 30 yrs and most of us will be very old or dead by then.


----------



## hypox

Without question, a percentage of large bucks taken in non-APR counties that border an APR county are from bucks that have a range in both counties, no?


----------



## Munsterlndr

hypox said:


> Without question, a percentage of large bucks taken in non-APR counties that border an APR county are from bucks that have a range in both counties, no?


So you are suggesting that a percentage of the large bucks taken in APR counties migrated in from non-APR counties and you can attribute their age to the policies in effect in those non-APR counties? Or does it just work one direction?


----------



## hypox

Munsterlndr said:


> So you are suggesting that a percentage of the large bucks taken in APR counties migrated in from non-APR counties and you can attribute their age to the policies in effect in those non-APR counties? Or does it just work one direction?


It works more often where the yearlings are protected.


----------



## Munsterlndr

hypox said:


> It works more often where the yearling are protected.


Opinion? or do you want to to offer some proof to support that idea.....


----------



## hypox

Munsterlndr said:


> Opinion? or do you want to to offer some proof to support that idea.....


I would like you to prove otherwise because you are the one posting pictures of bucks from non-APR counties not knowing it they were taken a stones throw from an APR county.


----------



## thebroncrider

Funny that there is a whole argument going on with mostly just one guy. So if the numbers end up being 20 in favor and 1 against, well that is a big change and the regulations will probably have more chance next time. And then does it matter what the 1 guy thought? Some people think that there should be no laws in general, and we all know that doesn't work.


----------



## hypox

Some old timers graciously step aside and let the next generation handle things, and others go out kicking and screaming...lol


----------



## Munsterlndr

hypox said:


> I would like you to prove otherwise because you are the one posting pictures of bucks from non-APR counties not knowing it they were taken a stones throw from an APR county.


So you make an unsubstantiated claim and then expect someone else to prove it wrong. Um, that's not really how it works. LoL....


----------



## thebroncrider

Here is what we know. Many areas in the NW13 have not had really good bucks with consistency for as long as I can remember. Now the area seems to be posting as many as the rest of the State. I know personally people who hunt public in that area that say it is the best it has ever been. One group took some SUPER deer. If the APRs can increase the potential in an area that lacks a lot of ag and other good food sources (in general, especially on state land), what could it do for areas that ALREADY can kick out some good deer? Just sayin'...Even with results there are some who are too blind to admit anything. Why argue with them?


----------



## brushbuster

I am personally enjoying this thread.LOL


----------



## JPWARD

Munster is right that an occasional buck up here in cheboygan and other non APR counties do live long enough to become mature and the rate seems to be increasing slightly every year. In 30 years we will be where the NW 13 is at now.


----------



## d_rek

thebroncrider said:


> Funny that there is a whole argument going on with mostly just one guy. So if the numbers end up being 20 in favor and 1 against, well that is a big change and the regulations will probably have more chance next time. And then does it matter what the 1 guy thought? Some people think that there should be no laws in general, and we all know that doesn't work.


I'm still trying to decide if it's ironic or brilliant that his profile picture is of Teddy Roosevelt, a president who arguably single handedly pioneered the modern conservation movement in the United States. Wonder what the wilderness warrior would think about APRs and the modern hunters ability(or inability depending where you're standing) to self regulate in the best interest of our natural resources. 


-Sent from d_mobile


----------



## Munsterlndr

thebroncrider said:


> Here is what we know. Many areas in the NW13 have not had really good bucks with consistency for as long as I can remember. Now the area seems to be posting as many as the rest of the State.


In all honesty can't the same thing be said about a number of other counties in the NLP? Have Cheboygan, Crawford, Otsego, Ogemaw, Presque Isle, Alpena, etc. been known as big buck factories in the past? Now those areas seem to be posting as many as the rest of the NW13, why do you think that is?


----------



## beer and nuts

Haha...well that does it. Guys that don't hunt in the APR counties are posting about how it is working(based on who cares!!)..and then a number of others posting.....and a one guy(Munster) who hunts in the APR.


> Funny that there is a whole argument going on with mostly just one guy.


 Must be a newbie here!

So now we have to base on the success of apr's from the number of guys on a forum participating who might be for or against, nor matter if they hunted in the region or not. I'd bet if the subject matter wasn't NW13 big bucks...we might not ever get guys hunting in the NW13 to talk about it!!


----------



## Munsterlndr

d_rek said:


> I'm still trying to decide if it's ironic or brilliant that his profile picture is of Teddy Roosevelt, a president who arguably single handedly pioneered the modern conservation movement in the United States. Wonder what the wilderness warrior would think about APRs and the modern hunters ability(or inability depending where you're standing) to self regulate in the best interest of our natural resources.
> 
> 
> -Sent from d_mobile


He would be smart enough to know that it's BS to claim that APR's are being done in the best interest of our natural resources. LoL.


----------



## Waif

hypox said:


> Some old timers graciously step aside and let the next generation handle things, and others go out kicking and screaming...lol


Some youngsters respect their elders.
Others just run their mouths at them and disagree with their knowledge and ways..
Given enough time through aging they will understand their elders perspectives though.
Ironic when wanting older deer is the subject as if their value is greater than any other age.
Just another resource to manage for exploitation and greater gratification for all synthetic (truth or falsity determinable by recourse to experience) lovers ignoring the opinions of those having been at it longer.


----------



## Munsterlndr

JPWARD said:


> Munster is right that an occasional buck up here in cheboygan and other non APR counties do live long enough to become mature and the rate seems to be increasing slightly every year. In 30 years we will be where the NW 13 is at now.


Have you looked at the bucks being posted on MIBUCKPOLE this year from the non-APR NLP counties? Compare those posted from Cheboygan since the firearm opener to those posted across the county line in Emmet during the same period. 

Again, I'm not suggesting that pictures are proof of anything but it certainly seems like all of Northern Michigan is producing some nice, older bucks this year.


----------



## JPWARD

Not sure about the other posters but i have lived and hunted in cheboygan non APR area for 15 yrs and used to live and still hunt in NW 13 for last 40 yrs so i think i have a finger on the pulse of the change that has occurred


----------



## Joe Archer

Munsterlndr said:


> Have you looked at the bucks being posted on MIBUCKPOLE this year from the non-APR NLP counties? Compare those posted from Cheboygan since the firearm opener to those posted across the county line in Emmet during the same period.
> 
> Again, I'm not suggesting that pictures are proof of anything but it certainly seems like all of Northern Michigan is producing some nice, older bucks this year.


Maybe there are some *other factors affecting antler growth this year* as well...
A comparison of antler growth of my 2014 and 2015 deer might suggest that a lot had to do with favorable environmental factors this year...
*My 2014 NeLP deer that DNR confirmed was a 3.5 year old*...









*My 2015 NeLP deer that is most likely a 2.5-3.5 year old (unconfirmed at this time)*....








These deer were taken in locations less than 500 yards apart. 
<----<<<


----------



## triplelunger

hypox said:


> Without question, a percentage of large bucks taken in non-APR counties that border an APR county are from bucks that have a range in both counties, no?


You've got it backwards. The big bucks shot in the APR counties migrated from the non APR counties... prove me wrong. 
The big bucks across the state are actually a result of invasive alien bio-engineering... prove me wrong. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## hypox

Waif said:


> Some youngsters


Youngster!

Thanks man, I really needed that today....I really did!


----------



## brushbuster

Joe Archer said:


> Maybe there are some *other factors affecting antler growth this year* as well...
> A comparison of antler growth of my 2014 and 2015 deer might suggest that a lot had to do with favorable environmental factors this year...
> *My 2014 NeLP deer that DNR confirmed was a 3.5 year old*...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *My 2015 NeLP deer that is most likely a 2.5-3.5 year old (unconfirmed at this time)*....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These deer were taken in locations less than 500 yards apart.
> <----<<<


I think the DNR official that aged the first buck was either stoned or drunk lol


----------



## hypox

triplelunger said:


> You've got it backwards. The big bucks shot in the APR counties migrated from the non APR counties... prove me wrong.
> The big bucks across the state are actually a result of invasive alien bio-engineering... prove me wrong.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


_You've got it backwards. The big bucks shot in the APR counties migrated from the non APR counties... prove me wrong._* - I can't prove this wrong, because a percentage of them are.*

_The big bucks across the state are actually a result of invasive alien bio-engineering... prove me wrong._* - That would be awesome dude!

*


----------



## Joe Archer

brushbuster said:


> I think the DNR official that aged the first buck was either stoned or drunk lol


Yeah! ... or completely *unbiased by antler growth *as all they use to evaluate age are the submitted *teeth/jaw* . I was also pretty sure I had sighted the 2014 deer 2 years prior... 
But don't feel bad! Most people who hunt outside of a non-ag NeLp area are surprised at the lack of antler growth that is generally the norm up there. Most years a 4.5 year old will struggle to score 100 or so.
If this beast (below) isn't a 4.5 year old ... I'll eat my 33 year old hat!








<----<<<


----------



## Scout 2

You guys have the reason for the big bucks this year is all the fertillizer spread by someone that pushed so hard. I hope that most talking realize that what pictures shown only represent a very small percentage the the people that hunt in the NW 13. I know some do as they have the experence hunting there


----------



## brushbuster

Joe Archer said:


> Yeah! ... or completely *unbiased by antler growth *as all they use to evaluate age are the submitted *teeth/jaw* . I was also pretty sure I had sighted the 2014 deer 2 years prior...
> But don't feel bad! Most people who hunt outside of a non-ag NeLp area are surprised at the lack of antler growth that is generally the norm up there. Most years a 4.5 year old will struggle to score 100 or so.
> If this beast (below) isn't a 4.5 year old ... I'll eat my 33 year old hat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <----<<<


That I can agree with, but not that lil 1.5 yr old in your first pic. And BTW I lived up here in non AG big Woodsville for years I am fully aware of the bucks that grow up here.


----------



## mustang72

Finally got to talk to my neighbor to get a report of the surrounding property's (400 acres). So far an 8 point,9point,10 point and my 11 point all in Missaukee county. Best year since I've been hunting up there (1995).


----------



## The Fishing Pollock

That 3rd picture on MI buck pole in antrim county are the 2 i helped drag out of the woods. I missed an oppertunity at a 3rd buck that just slowly walked by us . Could not get the gun outa the truck, uncased, loaded in time.


----------



## mbrewer

d_rek said:


> It is not contradictory because the sample size is not the entire State of Michigan - it is the NW13! We are not measuring the NW13 against the other 70 counties in the State of Michigan! We are asking if APRs in the NW13 counties are successful in those counties - not in other non-APR counties!
> 
> You keep diverting the argument away from what we're actually discussing... and your argument still remains fallible!


What is your baseline for comparison? 

I think what the other gentleman is trying to establish is equivalency. 

I appreciate hearing and seeing all the firsthand information. There is value in that. I see little to no value in the politics of unsolicited, unauthorized compilations designed to impress, assist or whatever. Isn't necessary, isn't required but is useful. 

The only objection to awarding equivalency to photographic "evidence" such as that in question is that it makes it uncomfortably clear who supports blindly and who doesn't.

The regs will protect a certain percentage of bucks for a certain percentage of time. They're working, they can't not work. There is no need to shield them from scrutiny. Particularly when the shield isn't a shield it's a filter.


----------



## brushbuster

I might have to rethink that Joe, That buck don't look much bigger than this 2.5 yo DNR aged Crawford co buck


Joe Archer said:


> Yeah! ... or completely *unbiased by antler growth *as all they use to evaluate age are the submitted *teeth/jaw* . I was also pretty sure I had sighted the 2014 deer 2 years prior...
> But don't feel bad! Most people who hunt outside of a non-ag NeLp area are surprised at the lack of antler growth that is generally the norm up there. Most years a 4.5 year old will struggle to score 100 or so.
> If this beast (below) isn't a 4.5 year old ... I'll eat my 33 year old hat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <----<<<





brushbuster said:


> That I can agree with, but not that lil 1.5 yr old in your first pic. And BTW I lived up here in non AG big Woodsville for years I am fully aware of the bucks that grow up here.


----------



## bignuge

Joe Archer said:


> Maybe there are some *other factors affecting antler growth this year* as well...
> A comparison of antler growth of my 2014 and 2015 deer might suggest that a lot had to do with favorable environmental factors this year...
> *My 2014 NeLP deer that DNR confirmed was a 3.5 year old*...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *My 2015 NeLP deer that is most likely a 2.5-3.5 year old (unconfirmed at this time)*....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These deer were taken in locations less than 500 yards apart.
> <----<<<


 I think you need to have your buck aged by the same dnr official as it seems highly unlikely the 2014 Deer is 3.5 and even more unlikely that the 2015 deer is 2.5. I would be interested in hearing the results of the aging for sure.


----------



## mbrewer

brushbuster said:


> I might have to rethink that Joe, That buck don't look much bigger than this 2.5 yo DNR aged Crawford co buck
> 
> 
> View attachment 197235
> View attachment 197235


Drunk or stoned...really? I'm surprised to see you way in with such strong opinions based on so little information. You probably should have saved that turkey for Thanksgiving.


----------



## brushbuster

mbrewer said:


> Drunk or stoned...really? I'm surprised to see you way in with such strong opinions based on so little information. You probably should have saved that turkey for Thanksgiving.


Honest. You should have seen the DNR official that aged my buck, she looked like she just got up from a dorm party. LOL


----------



## Joe Archer

brushbuster said:


> That I can agree with, but not that lil 1.5 yr old in your first pic. And BTW I lived up here in non AG big Woodsville for years *I am fully aware of the bucks that grow up here.*


....apparently not. If this deer is 1.5, again there goes my 33 year old hunting hat!










brushbuster said:


> Honest. You should have seen the DNR official that aged my buck, she looked like she just got up from a dorm party. LOL


I don't see the person who ages the deer when I send the heads in for TB testing.... 
<----<<<


----------



## boomer_x7

Munsterlndr said:


> Depends on how you define worse. Since it's generally a subjective evaluation that is limited to the individual, I won't speak for anyone else but myself. Personally, after hunting under them 10 years, they have not improved my hunting and have at times limited my opportunities to put meat in the freezer, which is the primary reason that I hunt. So in that respect, they have made my hunting "worse". Others that I know feel the same way but I won't speak for them.
> 
> Having said that, I have not said in this thread that APR's have made hunting worse on the macro scale, so don't imply that I have. My focus has been on the claim that pictures of bucks posted on social media are proof positive that "APR's" are "working", as has been claimed by a number of posters. It begs the simple question that if they are proof of the success of APR's, then what is the explanation for similar pictures of big bucks coming out of non-APR counties this year. Few seem to want to discuss that fact, they seem to prefer attacking me for even raising the question.


If APR's has made your hunting worse why do you continue to lease land for 10 years in an APR zone?


----------



## Whitetail Freak

With all the hype about mibuckpole, I had to look for myself. I went to kent county since that's the one I hunt and am familiar with. All I seen was a bunch of nice 2 yr olds and a few very nice older deer. 

I'm sure the snow storm before the gun opener saved a bunch of yearlings which resulted in a whole lot more 2 yr olds. It kept a lot of people from traveling up north so I'm sure there was more than normal 2 yr olds in the non apr counties. Wouldn't surprise me next yr will show less nice deer In the non apr counties and the apr counties will be shining. Yup that's my opinion.


----------



## mbrewer

Whitetail Freak said:


> With all the hype about mibuckpole, I had to look for myself. I went to kent county since that's the one I hunt and am familiar with. All I seen was a bunch of nice 2 yr olds and a few very nice older deer.
> 
> I'm sure the snow storm before the gun opener saved a bunch of yearlings which resulted in a whole lot more 2 yr olds. It kept a lot of people from traveling up north so I'm sure there was more than normal 2 yr olds in the non apr counties. Wouldn't surprise me next yr will show less nice deer In the non apr counties and the apr counties will be shining. Yup that's my opinion.


You might be right.

Last year probably hurt the numbers, this year probably helped. A single year doesn't mean much one way or the other. 5 years of data will tell a better story, or two or three.


----------



## brushbuster

Joe Archer said:


> ....apparently not. If this deer is 1.5, again there goes my 33 year old hunting hat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see the person who ages the deer when I send the heads in for TB testing....
> <----<<<


 You like salt and pepper?


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

FWIW Joe, I think all the bucks you posted are typical NLP 2.5 year olds. Except the big guy, he's at least 3.5. Antler growth can vary greatly in the 2 year old class, especially with different winter severities.


----------



## Joe Archer

brushbuster said:


> You like salt and pepper?


I stand corrected and most humbly apologize. You are obviously way more qualified than *DNR biologists at the disease lab *or myself to judge the age of deer in the area that *I have been hunting for over 30 years*. 
Can you give TB (or CWD) results by glancing at pictures over the Internet as well? Sure would be VERY helpful!
<----<<<


----------



## Joe Archer

Uncle Boopoo said:


> FWIW Joe, I think all the bucks you posted are typical NLP 2.5 year olds. Except the big guy, he's at least 3.5. Antler growth can vary greatly in the 2 year old class, especially with different winter severities.


.....*and THAT was the intent of my original post*.... I think this year is one influenced by above average environmental factors for antler growth as demonstrated by two similar aged bucks, with noticeably different antler characteristics.
Still, antler growth varies considerably with available agriculture in my area. For example Hillman and Presque Isle produce significantly larger racks than what is typically seen in my neck of the woods.
<----<<<


----------



## brushbuster

Joe Archer said:


> I stand corrected and most humbly apologize. You are obviously way more qualified than *DNR biologists at the disease lab *or myself to judge the age of deer in the area that *I have been hunting for over 30 years*.
> Can you give TB (or CWD) results by glancing at pictures over the Internet as well? Sure would be VERY helpful!
> <----<<<


No, I just don't believe you.I wont get banned will I?


----------



## Joe Archer

brushbuster said:


> No, I just don't believe you.I wont get banned will I?


No. But the fact that you don't believe that DNR aged my deer as I reported is only proof that you do not entirely understand age and antler characteristics for non-ag woodland NeLP deer. Again I reported the age that I received back from a submitted head to the Disease Lab Here is *THEIR report from the deer that you estimated to be 1.5 years old*...
But don't beat yourself up! Most people are seriously biased in their assessments because of the value they place on antlers..








<----<<<


----------



## brushbuster

Joe Archer said:


> No. But the fact that you don't believe that DNR aged my deer as I reported is only proof that you do not entirely understand age and antler characteristics for non-ag woodland NeLP deer. Again I reported the age that I received back from a submitted head to the Disease Lab Here is *THEIR report from the deer that you estimated to be 1.5 years old*...
> But don't beat yourself up! Most people are seriously biased in their assessments because of the value they place on antlers..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <----<<<


Bravo Joe


----------



## JPWARD

Munsterlndr said:


> Have you looked at the bucks being posted on MIBUCKPOLE this year from the non-APR NLP counties? Compare those posted from Cheboygan since the firearm opener to those posted across the county line in Emmet during the same period.
> 
> Again, I'm not suggesting that pictures are proof of anything but it certainly seems like all of Northern Michigan is producing some nice, older bucks this year.


One reason for this could be that there is more of a hunting culture in cheboygan and harvesting an older buck is somewhat of an anomaly so they are going to make a big deal about it and post.....the guys i know over in the NW 13 have taken nice bucks in the last 1-2 yrs and so have more people they know so they are less inclined to post prolificly


----------



## Munsterlndr

JPWARD said:


> One reason for this could be that there is more of a hunting culture in cheboygan and harvesting an older buck is somewhat of an anomaly so they are going to make a big deal about it and post.....the guys i know over in the NW 13 have taken nice bucks in the last 1-2 yrs and so have more people they know so they are less inclined to post prolificly


I'm sorry for being skeptical but it looks like you are really, really reaching with this hypothesis. There is a hunting culture all over Michigan, the idea that guys in the NW13 are so overloaded with large bucks that it's become mundane to the point that they don't even bother to post them is, well...no other way to put it....laughable.


----------



## Craves

Munsterlndr said:


> I have no idea,only that it was from Public land in Cheboygan County.
> 
> How about this Ogemaw County buck, did this one wander across another county from the NW12 before getting whacked? Come on, this idea that the big bucks pictured from non-APR counties are only part of some mass migration from within the NW13 is silly.


Agreed, so is the idea that anyone is ignoring any of the nice bucks taken in the non-APR counties. 

I'm actually considering coming up to the NW12 for muzzle loader season. 

Can't help but wonder what the local hotel, gas station, restaurant, & party store owners feel about more people coming up to their areas.

Things that make you go mmmm....


----------



## Munsterlndr

boomer_x7 said:


> If APR's has made your hunting worse why do you continue to lease land for 10 years in an APR zone?


I own the land I hunt on in Leelanau Co., as well as the hunting property that I have in Lake Co., no point in selling them just because of APR's as I use them for a variety of other purposes. The property that I leased was in Antrim and I have not leased it since APR's were put in place but it's being leased by friends, so I know what is been seen and harvested there, as we share cam pics, etc. 

Full disclosure, the reason that I stopped leasing in Antrim was not primarily due to the APR's, it had more to do with getting a new bird dog pup and planning on devoting more time to bird hunting in the fall, coupled with the increased availability of antlerless tags in Leelanau Co., which meant that I didn't need to rely on Antrim for access to antlerless tags. I'm not complaining about hunting under APR's, I've lived with it for a long time and it's just a minor irritation but since you asked me directly whether I thought the hunting was better or worse, I indicated what my opinion is.


----------



## poz

Craves said:


> Agreed, so is the idea that anyone is ignoring any of the nice bucks taken in the non-APR counties.
> 
> I'm actually considering coming up to the NW12 for muzzle loader season.
> 
> Can't help but wonder what the local hotel, gas station, restaurant, & party store owners feel about more people coming up to their areas.
> 
> Things that make you go mmmm....


Funny no one was worried about the hotels, restaurants etc. When they decided to thin the herd to well below carrying capacity .


----------



## JPWARD

Munsterlndr said:


> I'm sorry for being skeptical but it looks like you are really, really reaching with this hypothesis. There is a hunting culture all over Michigan, the idea that guys in the NW13 are so overloaded with large bucks that it's become mundane to the point that they don't even bother to post them is, well...no other way to put it....laughable.


Just stating my experience with friends and family from NW 13 that all got nice 8's or larger this year and none of them posted online or took to buck poles. Just like another friend who had his first 3 or 4 nice bucks mounted and now does not. They all still enjoy hunting mature deer but not noteworthy for the area.


----------



## jr28schalm

i am all for aprs..but now i got guys on federal land sitting on my property line never had that in 10 years...guess ill hinge cut more..lol


----------



## mbrewer

Joe Archer said:


> No. But the fact that you don't believe that DNR aged my deer as I reported is only proof that you do not entirely understand age and antler characteristics for non-ag woodland NeLP deer. Again I reported the age that I received back from a submitted head to the Disease Lab Here is *THEIR report from the deer that you estimated to be 1.5 years old*...
> But don't beat yourself up! Most people are seriously biased in their assessments because of the value they place on antlers..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <----<<<


Well played.


----------



## Luv2hunteup

protectionisamust said:


> 4 point on 1 side APR in zone 3
> 3 point on 1 side apr in zone 2
> No buck restriction in the u.p.
> 
> the non APR guys can take their business to the U.P. the small businesses get more $$ from hunters traveling back into the UP.
> 
> It's a win win for all. Everyone gets their extra special zone. Hey, That's the way this modern eta is going. Give in so everyone's happy and no one is offended


No thanks but I would be in favor of switching your zone 1 & 3 restrictions.


----------



## >WingIt<

Okay,

Let's say that APRs aren't the reason that there are more and bigger bucks in the 13. 
Talk about timing for whatever the outlying factors are that Munster has been searching for. They lineup precisely with what should be happening under the APR timetable. Coincidence? If it is that is legendary timing.


----------



## Oger

If we cant agree on aprs statwide at least go back to OBR....i for one am 100% for it as well as aprs....since i put my land into a strict qdm restriction....(8 pt AND wide as ears).....last 2 years .....2 mature bucks killed...started it in 2011...for only 52 acres...its ashame to neighbors still shoot 1.5's....the numbers would be even better


----------



## Craves

poz said:


> Funny no one was worried about the hotels, restaurants etc. When they decided to thin the herd to well below carrying capacity .


No one?


----------



## Munsterlndr

>WingIt< said:


> Okay,
> 
> Let's say that APRs aren't the reason that there are more and bigger bucks in the 13.
> Talk about timing for whatever the outlying factors are that Munster has been searching for. They lineup precisely with what should be happening under the APR timetable. Coincidence? If it is that is legendary timing.


So again, what is your explanation for the timing for what is being harvested in the non-APR NLP counties? Just coincidence that all of the NLP has seen an increase in older bucks posted on social media? Outliers? Mass migration of bucks out of the APR zone? Aliens? 

Or is it factors that would apply equally across the zone, such as climactic impacts, food availability, increased hunters due to lack deer in the UP? You tell me which set of explanations makes the most logical sense?


----------



## Munsterlndr

Oger said:


> If we cant agree on aprs statwide at least go back to OBR....i for one am 100% for it as well as aprs....since i put my land into a strict qdm restriction....(8 pt AND wide as ears).....last 2 years .....2 mature bucks killed...started it in 2011...for only 52 acres...its ashame to neighbors still shoot 1.5's....the numbers would be even better


Yeah, it's a damn shame that your neighbors continue to exercise free will and make harvest decisions that they are satisfied with, that needs to be nipped in the bud and they should be forced to adopt your approach.


----------



## Dadof2

And it continues. Longtime friend just killed this 2 hours ago in APR land. It's a bummer APR's aren't helping. I don't need any stats or social media. I've seen enough with my own two eyes. Believe what you will. The only bummer is land is getting sucked up around here and lease rates are climbing quickly. I guess there is a downside....


----------



## plugger

My wife does some euro mounts and processing for family and occasionally friends. I am very impressed with the deer I am seeing and two places come quickly to mind . Oceana county and Coopersville have been kicking out the nice bucks!


----------



## brushbuster

Dadof2 said:


> View attachment 197265
> View attachment 197266
> 
> 
> And it continues. Longtime friend just killed this 2 hours ago in APR land. It's a bummer APR's aren't helping. I don't need any stats or social media. I've seen enough with my own two eyes. Believe what you will. The only bummer is land is getting sucked up around here and lease rates are climbing quickly. I guess there is a downside....


I hear ya, I've been looking for a lease in grand traverse and southern kalkaska.


----------



## >WingIt<

Munsterlndr said:


> Yeah, it's a damn shame that your neighbors continue to exercise free will and make harvest decisions that they are satisfied with, that needs to be nipped in the bud and they should be forced to adopt your approach.


Take this statement Munster.... Insert your viewpoint. Same argument pointed right back at you. Except your are a minority trying to press your viewpoint on the majority.

And to your other point. Nice deer have always been around in Michigan from the UP to the Ohio Indiana boarder. I know this is the point you have been trying to drag out of everyone in this thread. Difference is that there haven't always been that many to pursue in the 12. The whole point of APRs was to get more deer to maturity or closer to it. 

Now you are going to say bingo... Then why do I need to work harder to shoot a deer under APRs when I just want to take the first deer I see with horns. Again, this can be twisted back towards your viewpoint. Why should someone who just wants a chance to take a mature deer be robbed of that because others like you want to shoot the first deer they see with horns. Both viewpoints are selfish in their own ways. I don't think anyone would dispute that. Difference is that APRs are accepted by the majority.

I encourage you to step off your property in Leelanua and drive 40 min to some public land south of you. That would put you in areas that I hunt where I have witnessed the impact that APRs are having. If you spent less time on social media and this website and more time out in the woods and scouting you may have some of your own positive APR experiences.


----------



## brushbuster

>WingIt< said:


> Take this statement Munster.... Insert your viewpoint. Same argument pointed right back at you. Except your are a minority trying to press your viewpoint on the majority.
> 
> And to your other point. Nice deer have always been around in Michigan from the UP to the Ohio Indiana boarder. I know this is the point you have been trying to drag out of everyone in this thread. Difference is that there haven't always been that many to pursue in the 12. The whole point of APRs was to get more deer to maturity or closer to it.
> 
> Now you are going to say bingo... Then why do I need to work harder to shoot a deer under APRs when I just want to take the first deer I see with horns. Again, this can be twisted back towards your viewpoint. Why should someone who just wants a chance to take a mature deer be robbed of that because others like you want to shoot the first deer they see with horns. Both viewpoints are selfish in their own ways. I don't think anyone would dispute that. Difference is that APRs are accepted by the majority.
> 
> I encourage you to step off your property in Leelanua and drive 40 min to some public land south of you. That would put you in areas that I hunt where I have witnessed the impact that APRs are having. If you spent less time on social media and this website and more time out in the woods and scouting you may have some of your own positive APR experiences.


He has positive experiences on his APR lands he just hasn't posted his pics of his nice bucks and deer herd yet. He will though to prove a point that fits his agenda. Just wait and see.


----------



## Munsterlndr

>WingIt< said:


> Take this statement Munster.... Insert your viewpoint. Same argument pointed right back at you. Except your are a minority trying to press your viewpoint on the majority.


Um, no, it;s not the same. I'm not forcing anyone to make harvest choices that they don't want to make. Prior to APR's, nobody was forcing you to shoot younger deer and lots of people chose not to. You could exercise your free will and nobody was attempting to force you not to. Your claim that the argument is no different is specious. 



Wingit said:


> And to your other point. Nice deer have always been around in Michigan from the UP to the Ohio Indiana boarder. I know this is the point you have been trying to drag out of everyone in this thread. Difference is that there haven't always been that many to pursue in the 12. The whole point of APRs was to get more deer to maturity or closer to it.


I'd agree that there have always been nice deer in Michigan. You used to have to work a little harder and put in a little more time but even in the NW12, they were there for those who wanted to pursue them, just like they are there currently in non-APR NLP counties this year. You want to make it easier for you to harvest an older deer, which is fine but the way that you want to go about making easier for you to harvest an older buck is to take away the freedom of choice from other hunters and force them to adhere to your way of thinking. 



Wingit said:


> Now you are going to say bingo... Then why do I need to work harder to shoot a deer under APRs when I just want to take the first deer I see with horns. Again, this can be twisted back towards your viewpoint. Why should someone who just wants a chance to take a mature deer be robbed of that because others like you want to shoot the first deer they see with horns. Both viewpoints are selfish in their own ways. I don't think anyone would dispute that. Difference is that APRs are accepted by the majority.


Deer are a public resource and should be managed as such, not as the private property of a select group of sportsmen who want to monopolize them by forcing others to adopt their viewpoint. That's my opinion and I realize that others have another opinion which is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. 



Wingit said:


> I encourage you to step off your property in Leelanua and drive 40 min to some public land south of you. That would put you in areas that I hunt where I have witnessed the impact that APRs are having. If you spent less time on social media and this website and more time out in the woods and scouting you may have some of your own positive APR experiences.


Wow, now we are back to you telling others what to do. There seems to be a pattern here. Thanks for the lecture, I'll be sure to give it the attention it deserves. LoL.


----------



## TKZ Outdoors

brushbuster said:


> I hear ya, I've been looking for a lease in grand traverse and southern kalkaska.


Brush we are looking at lease opportunities as well, if we find something I'll let you know.


----------



## coyote-hunter

"Yeah, it's a damn shame that your neighbors continue to exercise free will and make harvest decisions that they are satisfied with, that needs to be nipped in the bud and they should be forced to adopt your approach."

And it's a damn shame that you Munster and others like you, blatantly ignore sound management practices and do NOTHING to try and improve deer hunting in MI. Just because shooting immature bucks, shooting 2 bucks per year, shooting excessive does, are all legal in MI doesn't make it right. 

It's also a damn shame you spend all of your time on your keyboard posting like you do. If you spent even a fraction of the time you spend on this forum trying to improve our deer herd and supporting positive change, our herd would be better off. Every little bit helps. Every single one of your posts is hung up on data and statistics being perfect and frankly pointed at one underlying goal...to start an argument and/or curb enthusiasm and excitement. It's really old, depressing, and frankly exhausting. It pushes people like myself away from ever contributing on here. 

It's clear that the stance of the majority of hunters in the APRs areas is that they are working. It's clear the majority support them. Are APRs perfect? No. Would a OBR rule be perfect? No. Is the data proving these points perfect? No. And who cares??? I believe the majority of hunters recognize that advancing the age structure of our bucks is the right thing to do. I believe deep down inside hunters that oppose advancing age structure, either don't want impose self restraint, or do not want increased regulations imposed on them of any kind. 

Regardless, the majority of hunters communicate (via social media, surveys, personal communication, etc.) that they want to increase their chances of harvesting mature bucks. This can only be done if regulation changes occur. Is it statewide APRs? Is it a OBR? Does it truly matter? No. But the majority now supports it so let's all get behind a method and move forward.

No need to respond Munster as I will NEVER post here again. Just hoping my response will help at minimum focus at least one of your future posts in a positive direction for a a change, or at minimum, stop making reading this forum so painful...


----------



## Munsterlndr

coyote-hunter said:


> And it's a damn shame that you Munster and others like you, blatantly ignore sound management practices and do NOTHING to try and improve deer hunting in MI. .


If you don't like to read what I post, ignore, don't read it, problem solved. Last I looked this forum allows everyone to voice their opinion and point of view. Apparently you want to change that and silence anyone who says things that you don't want to hear. Sorry Bud, that is a you problem, not a me problem or an anyone else problem. Don't like it, don't read it. Pretty simple. Or you could engage in a rational discussion instead of launching an invective filled rant ending with a threat to never post again. Your choice, that's the great thing about internet forums.


----------



## triplelunger

Dadof2 said:


> View attachment 197265
> View attachment 197266
> 
> 
> And it continues. Longtime friend just killed this 2 hours ago in APR land. It's a bummer APR's aren't helping. I don't need any stats or social media. I've seen enough with my own two eyes. Believe what you will. The only bummer is land is getting sucked up around here and lease rates are climbing quickly. I guess there is a downside....


That's a super cool buck, but there's not a chance that buck was not a legal target last year! Therefore (based on my sometimes flawed logic) not a result of the restriction. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## beer and nuts

So coyote hunter, what have you done to support and improve the deer herd??

I'm sure you posts help, it was so positive!!!


----------



## bignuge

i say we all get the petition going for more apr and more strict management rules. If it's voted in by the majority then the minority has to conform. That's how it works in America!!! And God Bless it. My opinion is unchanged. APR works and we need more of it. 


still waiting to hear how old that buck was you shot this year joe archer.


Great night in the stand guys. Passed 4 little bucks.


----------



## triplelunger

bignuge said:


> i say we all get the petition going for more apr and more strict management rules. If it's voted in by the majority then the minority has to conform. That's how it works in America!!! And God Bless it. My opinion is unchanged. APR works and we need more of it.
> 
> 
> still waiting to hear how old that buck was you shot this year joe archer.
> 
> 
> Great night in the stand guys. Passed 4 little bucks.


Would that include magazine capacity restrictions and assault rifle bans, too?
Maybe Hillary can use it as a campaign booster!

Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## bignuge

triplelunger said:


> That's a super cool buck, but there's not a chance that buck was not a legal target last year! Therefore (based on my sometimes flawed logic) not a result of the restriction.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


Restrictions have been in effect for a couple years now. Maybe he got a free pass two years ago and slipped thru the cracks last year. Very likely a product of APR.


----------



## >WingIt<

Munsterlndr said:


> Um, no, it;s not the same. I'm not forcing anyone to make harvest choices that they don't want to make. Prior to APR's, nobody was forcing you to shoot younger deer and lots of people chose not to. You could exercise your free will and nobody was attempting to force you not to. Your claim that the argument is no different is specious.
> 
> It is the same. They are both selfish. Some areas didn't even have a mature deer on them. I would say with confidence that almost every decent sized piece has one now. In the past who knows. You could have been pissing in the wind trying to hunt a piece of property that didn't have a mature animal because none made it to maturity or had a chance to because people had to have their deer. Harvesting deer is a privilege not a right. So yes both are selfish and similar. It just depends on what side of the fence you fall on.
> 
> 
> I'd agree that there have always been nice deer in Michigan. You used to have to work a little harder and put in a little more time but even in the NW12, they were there for those who wanted to pursue them, just like they are there currently in non-APR NLP counties this year. You want to make it easier for you to harvest an older deer, which is fine but the way that you want to go about making easier for you to harvest an older buck is to take away the freedom of choice from other hunters and force them to adhere to your way of thinking.
> You want to make it easier for you to harvest a deer which is fine but the way you want to do it is to take away chances for others to harvest mature animals by letting less deer reach maturity. Again, your argument can be spun right around on itself and make you look selfish and all the things you claim others are who support APRs.
> 
> 
> Deer are a public resource and should be managed as such, not as the private property of a select group of sportsmen who want to monopolize them by forcing others to adopt their viewpoint. That's my opinion and I realize that others have another opinion which is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
> I agree, and the public voted in a vast majority to manage them with APRs. Something you can't come to grips with. Again you are a minority trying to dictate a majority.
> 
> 
> Wow, now we are back to you telling others what to do. There seems to be a pattern here. Thanks for the lecture, I'll be sure to give it the attention it deserves. LoL.


I agree, 

Every time there is anything positive being said about APRs a guy who goes by Munster always feels the need to chime in with condescending rhetoric.


----------



## triplelunger

bignuge said:


> Restrictions have been in effect for a couple years now. Maybe he got a free pass two years ago and slipped thru the cracks last year. Very likely a product of APR.


It's obvious he has survived multiple seasons, but not as a result of MANDATORY apr. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## brushbuster

bignuge said:


> i say we all get the petition going for more apr and more strict management rules. If it's voted in by the majority then the minority has to conform. That's how it works in America!!! And God Bless it. My opinion is unchanged. APR works and we need more of it.
> 
> 
> still waiting to hear how old that buck was you shot this year joe archer.
> 
> 
> Great night in the stand guys. Passed 4 little bucks.


Patience, the ranks are filing in.


----------



## trophy18

I was a long time believer in not wanting to be told what I can and can't shoot. However the nw13 counties has changed my views. I desperately hope apr's are introduced into arenac county.


----------



## protectionisamust

bignuge said:


> i say we all get the petition going for more apr and more strict management rules. If it's voted in by the majority then the minority has to conform. That's how it works in America!!! And God Bless it. My opinion is unchanged. APR works and we need more of it.


unfortunantly there will be another jacked up vote needing 65% to get something passed

In america - I thought 51% was considered the majority in a vote but in APR land, you need 65% :coco:

If this goes to a state wide vote, even the PETA people will vote yes because there's a chance
for that cute little deer will live!! I'm telling you, APR's are coming and the folks thinking otherwise,
I think are just in denial.


----------



## jr28schalm

With all the extra hunters in the nw 12 , i think dnr should sell a special permit to hunt the state and federal land there...lol


----------



## Dadof2

triplelunger said:


> That's a super cool buck, but there's not a chance that buck was not a legal target last year! Therefore (based on my sometimes flawed logic) not a result of the restriction.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app


True. But when the 2.5 year olds start increasing a few more make it to 3.5. When hunters see more 3.5 year old bucks and older(both during summer scouting and trail cam pics) they no longer have the interest in 2.5 year olds thereby advancing age structure. Not always true but that is what is happening. Lived here my whole life and wasn't sold on APR's right away but am now. This particular guy passed several 2.5 and even 3.5 year old deer just because he had pics of this buck. He actually missed him Nov. 14 with a bow. His brother shot a 130" as well. I think that's what APR's are doing. Once a hunter has confidence that 3.5+ deer are there they are targeting them and leaving the 2.5's to grow. Not all, but enough.


----------



## brushbuster

jr28schalm said:


> With all the extra hunters in the nw 12 , i think dnr should sell a special permit to hunt the state and federal land there...lol


I would buy one


----------



## 2508speed

trophy18 said:


> I was a long time believer in not wanting to be told what I can and can't shoot. However the nw13 counties has changed my views. I desperately hope apr's are introduced into arenac county.


I think APR's might work in Arenac. Not a lot of state land there for me to enjoy it though. I'm all for APR's on private land. Just don't restrict me on public land. Let's make a law that land owners have to have APR's. I'll go for that. State and Federal stay the same. Then we all feel good.


----------



## brushbuster

Dadof2 said:


> True. But when the 2.5 year olds start increasing a few more make it to 3.5. When hunters see more 3.5 year old bucks and older(both during summer scouting and trail cam pics) they no longer have the interest in 2.5 year olds thereby advancing age structure. Not always true but that is what is happening. Lived here my whole life and wasn't sold on APR's right away but am now. This particular guy passed several 2.5 and even 3.5 year old deer just because he had pics of this buck. He actually missed him Nov. 14 with a bow. His brother shot a 130" as well. I think that's what APR's are doing. Once a hunter has confidence that 3.5+ deer are there they are targeting them and leaving the 2.5's to grow. Not all, but enough.


True DAT. I've passed up a few 8s and sixes this year., as well as seeing several spikes and forks that i know have a great chance in making it through the year. Looking forward to next year


----------



## camp42

triplelunger said:


> That's a super cool buck, but there's not a chance that buck was not a legal target last year! Therefore (based on my sometimes flawed logic) not a result of the restriction.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> You are correct. But he could have been passed as a 1.5 and a lot smarter at 2.5. Thus making his chances to reach 3.5 much better. Another great thing about APRs. The success compounds year after year


----------



## bignuge

triplelunger said:


> Would that include magazine capacity restrictions and assault rifle bans, too?
> Maybe Hillary can use it as a campaign booster!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Ohub Campfire mobile app



your logic is ridiculous. Good point tho. Obviously more rules in hunting will lead directly to the banning of guns.


----------



## brushbuster

He could've even been a sublegal spike the year before APRs were in place. I seen one just this year. The little spikes barely made 2 inches
This post was meant for camp. The quote option didn't work


----------



## NorthWoodsHunter

Where are the graphs bio had that showed age comparisons of deer shot in these counties? These paint a pretty clear picture and will even more so this year I believe.


----------



## Craves

Munsterlndr said:


> Um, no, it;s not the same. I'm not forcing anyone to make harvest choices that they don't want to make. Prior to APR's, nobody was forcing you to shoot younger deer and lots of people chose not to. You could exercise your free will and nobody was attempting to force you not to. Your claim that the argument is no different is specious.
> 
> 
> I'd agree that there have always been nice deer in Michigan. You used to have to work a little harder and put in a little more time but even in the NW12, they were there for those who wanted to pursue them, just like they are there currently in non-APR NLP counties this year. You want to make it easier for you to harvest an older deer, which is fine but the way that you want to go about making easier for you to harvest an older buck is to take away the freedom of choice from other hunters and force them to adhere to your way of thinking.
> 
> 
> 
> Deer are a public resource and should be managed as such, not as the private property of a select group of sportsmen who want to monopolize them by forcing others to adopt their viewpoint. That's my opinion and I realize that others have another opinion which is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
> 
> 
> Wow, now we are back to you telling others what to do. There seems to be a pattern here. Thanks for the lecture, I'll be sure to give it the attention it deserves. LoL.


All this rhetoric coming from the same guy who on this very site wrote that he could support APR'S if they fit what he thought would be right. 

And the beat goes on...


----------



## cmueller302

Why won't these results be the same for NW12?
Now like every Michigan hunter I am going to bed praying that I get a chance at a beautiful three point in the morning......not. I think it is comical that people will bash MAPR but hope to see a monster buck opening day. I know one fact, if a deer lives past one he will be two. I do feel sorry for the guy trying to fill his freezer, but lets be honest how much does a tag cost, how much in ammo, weapons, clothing, blinds, gas, and time does that person spend in the woods trying to "fill his freezer"? Take that money and buy beef I think you will get more for your money! With the amount of hunters in Michigan the deer need a little protection to have a birthday or two. 


Sent from my iPad using Ohub Campfire


----------



## Munsterlndr

NorthWoodsHunter said:


> Where are the graphs bio had that showed age comparisons of deer shot in these counties? These paint a pretty clear picture and will even more so this year I believe.


Bio's graphs show changes in the percentage of age classes in the total antlered harvest. They don't show the actual harvest distributed by age class, the DNR does not gather that data. When you remove the bulk of an age class from the graph, it's a given that the percentages that the other age classes make up will increase, they have to. Check station data, unlike the harvest survey data, is not random statistically valid data due to the methods used to gather it. It's based on an extremely small, non-random sample, so to try and extrapolate the actual impact of age classes within the herd can be problematic. In the absence of any other data, it's better then nothing but it should be viewed as being substantially less accurate then the harvest data that is gathered.

For example, in looking at the check station data from Antrim County, 5 years pre-APR and the two years that APR's had been in place, this is what you see;

The average number of 3.5 year old bucks checked pre-APR (5 year baseline) was 22 per year. The average number of 3.5 year old bucks checked under APR's has been 18. During the baseline period, those 22 3.5 year old bucks harvested every year represented 16% of the total antlered harvest. Under APR's, because most of the yearling age class has been removed from the sample, that percentage increases to 28%. Now if you look at a graph that shows the change in percentage, you are going to see a line that goes way up and you would say, "Wow, the percentage of 3.5 year old bucks in Antrim County has almost doubled in just two years under APR's!" That ignores that the actual average number of bucks checked from that age class went down under APR's. 

Bio will claim that actual numbers mean nothing, that percentages are everything and if this was based on a random sample he might have a case but the fact is that it's not in any way shape or form a random sample, it's simply data that is voluntarily provided by hunters and is a very, very tiny number of the actual deer killed annually. So as with anything, from both sides of the debate, take it with a grain of salt and make up your own mind based on personal experience.


----------



## Oger

Munsterlndr said:


> Yeah, it's a damn shame that your neighbors continue to exercise free will and make harvest decisions that they are satisfied with, that needs to be nipped in the bud and they should be forced to adopt your approach.


Using your logic we shouldnt have minimum lengths on fish then.Keep everything. Actually for that matter you should be able to kill an animal anytime reproduction is complete for that year so as to exercise your free will. There are 2 issues here 1)poor hunting skills 2) gluteny. During the first 3 years of our qdm tremendous restraint was practiced which was very tough. Btw if i wanted some meat we took a nice big mature doe which is much more of a challenge then a year and half dumb buck.


----------



## yea buddy

I would love to see the zone 1 laws be state wide. Deer tag = any buck. Combo = 3 on one side and 4 on one side. Everyone wins. I have hunted in the nw 13 for over 10 years on 100% state land. I have seen more 2.5 and older bucks in the last two years then all the years combined. This don't mean a guy will come up and shoot one with easy. We put in a lot of work still to find the bucks. I do know one thing I seen over 20 bucks in the last week that will live and have a good chance of being 2.5 next year. The buck doe ratio is the best I have seen in this state there. When the apr started on the nw 13 the guys I hunt with almost didn't hunt there any longer. I will say we all didn't want to be told what to shoot. We also shot all 1.5 except 3 deer in about 7 years. Last two years haven't shot a deer under 3.5. We are now passing 2.5 that are legal bucks to shoot. It's because we know if we put in the work and time we can shoot a 3.5. It's gonna be interesting in the next few years in the nw 13. The hunting pressure will be very high I believe. I know there was a big increase this year in the area I hunt.


----------



## Munsterlndr

Oger said:


> Using your logic we shouldnt have minimum lengths on fish then.


We shouldn't have minimum lengths on fish unless there is a demonstrable, biological advantage to doing so, IMO. What are the demonstrable, biological advantages to having mandatory APR's?


----------



## Oger

>WingIt< said:


> Take this statement Munster.... Insert your viewpoint. Same argument pointed right back at you. Except your are a minority trying to press your viewpoint on the majority.
> 
> And to your other point. Nice deer have always been around in Michigan from the UP to the Ohio Indiana boarder. I know this is the point you have been trying to drag out of everyone in this thread. Difference is that there haven't always been that many to pursue in the 12. The whole point of APRs was to get more deer to maturity or closer to it.
> 
> Now you are going to say bingo... Then why do I need to work harder to shoot a deer under APRs when I just want to take the first deer I see with horns. Again, this can be twisted back towards your viewpoint. Why should someone who just wants a chance to take a mature deer be robbed of that because others like you want to shoot the first deer they see with horns. Both viewpoints are selfish in their own ways. I don't think anyone would dispute that. Difference is that APRs are accepted by the majority.
> 
> I encourage you to step off your property in Leelanua and drive 40 min to some public land south of you. That would put you in areas that I hunt where I have witnessed the impact that APRs are having. If you spent less time on social media and this website and more time out in the woods and scouting you may have some of your own positive APR experiences.


Well said ....bravo..........i dont know too many people who toss and turn the night before dreaming of a spike. You nailed it less time on the computer and more time working on skills that would allow a mature deer to be killed. Not some baby.


----------



## Oger

coyote-hunter said:


> "Yeah, it's a damn shame that your neighbors continue to exercise free will and make harvest decisions that they are satisfied with, that needs to be nipped in the bud and they should be forced to adopt your approach."
> 
> And it's a damn shame that you Munster and others like you, blatantly ignore sound management practices and do NOTHING to try and improve deer hunting in MI. Just because shooting immature bucks, shooting 2 bucks per year, shooting excessive does, are all legal in MI doesn't make it right.
> 
> It's also a damn shame you spend all of your time on your keyboard posting like you do. If you spent even a fraction of the time you spend on this forum trying to improve our deer herd and supporting positive change, our herd would be better off. Every little bit helps. Every single one of your posts is hung up on data and statistics being perfect and frankly pointed at one underlying goal...to start an argument and/or curb enthusiasm and excitement. It's really old, depressing, and frankly exhausting. It pushes people like myself away from ever contributing on here.
> 
> It's clear that the stance of the majority of hunters in the APRs areas is that they are working. It's clear the majority support them. Are APRs perfect? No. Would a OBR rule be perfect? No. Is the data proving these points perfect? No. And who cares??? I believe the majority of hunters recognize that advancing the age structure of our bucks is the right thing to do. I believe deep down inside hunters that oppose advancing age structure, either don't want impose self restraint, or do not want increased regulations imposed on them of any kind.
> 
> Regardless, the majority of hunters communicate (via social media, surveys, personal communication, etc.) that they want to increase their chances of harvesting mature bucks. This can only be done if regulation changes occur. Is it statewide APRs? Is it a OBR? Does it truly matter? No. But the majority now supports it so let's all get behind a method and move forward.
> 
> No need to respond Munster as I will NEVER post here again. Just hoping my response will help at minimum focus at least one of your future posts in a positive direction for a a change, or at minimum, stop making reading this forum so painful...


Well said. ....i cant figure out how to do the like thumb. .........spending too much time in tree killing mature deer


----------



## trophy18

2508speed said:


> I think APR's might work in Arenac. Not a lot of state land there for me to enjoy it though. I'm all for APR's on private land. Just don't restrict me on public land. Let's make a law that land owners have to have APR's. I'll go for that. State and Federal stay the same. Then we all feel good.


I just don't see your justification? All apr's do is protect spikes and 4s . Yes the first year of apr's will be slower . However the next year will be loaded. The deer don't know what's state land and what's not. Also that would be completely unenforceable and would ruin the point of getting more 2 1/2s


----------



## thebroncrider

Can't believe this argument is still going. Guys, you will never present enough info to change the minds of people who present themselves as the local curmudgeon. 23 pages later, still arguing every point. Best thing to do is just convince those who have an open mind and simply out vote the rest. Then it doesn't matter what they think. Always keep in mind, those who don't get it, don't get that they don't get it...you'll never convince them of it...really...


----------



## Steve

Oger said:


> Using your logic we shouldnt have minimum lengths on fish then.Keep everything. Actually for that matter you should be able to kill an animal anytime reproduction is complete for that year so as to exercise your free will. There are 2 issues here 1)poor hunting skills 2) gluteny. During the first 3 years of our qdm tremendous restraint was practiced which was very tough. Btw if i wanted some meat we took a nice big mature doe which is much more of a challenge then a year and half dumb buck.


Yeap, same idea. Protect immature fish. Have you ice fished public lakes for species of fish with no size limit like gills and perch?


----------



## Oger

Munsterlndr said:


> We shouldn't have minimum lengths on fish unless there is a demonstrable, biological advantage to doing so, IMO. What are the demonstrable, biological advantages to having mandatory APR's?


really because there is a DEMOSTRABLE BIOLOGICAL ADVANTAGE IN fingerling walleye or bass in your thinking? You dont even make sense. Your like talking to a drunk. Im going to bed so i can wake up and shoot a nice big doe for the freezer. You just stay on this all night and complain so you can exercise your free will.


----------



## Captain of the 4-C's

I can think of one advantage to having older bucks Munster. Young bucks tend to run themselves to near death during the rut if there are no older bucks to do the breeding. Older bucks know when a doe is ready and spend less energy chasing. If you have older bucks around - the survival of the "young studs" should improve with severe winters. Think back when we had 20 does to one young buck. They burned off all their fat and did not have time to pack it back on before the nasty winters we experience sometimes.

I am still not an APR fan.


----------



## brushbuster

hartman756 said:


> You know why there is so much support for MARs in the NWLP on this thread? It has been brought to my attention that the QDMers have instructed all their followers on facebook to come over here and post positive things about the NWLP 13 !


Hahaha, now that is too funny. Damn QDMers, what facebook page was that on?


----------



## 12970

Yes I can say other things across the state have made rack production better this year than the past many... Again some just seem to realize that what is happening could be just a small part to the APR in the 13 but others think it is the only reason why. I have got so many good bucks on game cameras this year as well as smaller bucks I was surprised with so many but also more Coyotes, a Bobcat a first and bears and some with cubs...

The deer seem to finding more to browse on as well where nothing has been planted so again many factors could be a part of why there could be more bucks or maybe they just stepped out and offer more a shot at them!. Cannot just go by a single year to think it is having that much of an effect. Could be other things, too early to know and other variables that could have helped as well.

Also how many are using minerals now? Many things that can change the rack production.

Plus how many more might be hunting the 13 Area? Lots of things that could effect this.


Newaygo1


----------



## brushbuster

hartman756 said:


> You know why there is so much support for MARs in the NWLP on this thread? It has been brought to my attention that the QDMers have instructed all their followers on facebook to come over here and post positive things about the NWLP 13 !


I thought this was hilarious so I thought I would check out the NWMIQDMA I found this so I thought I would post it here in case people might want to respond


----------



## mustang72

hartman756 said:


> You know why there is so much support for MARs in the NWLP on this thread? It has been brought to my attention that the QDMers have instructed all their followers on facebook to come over here and post positive things about the NWLP 13 !


 Ya that's why...your so S.M.A.R.T


----------



## Munsterlndr

Brushbuster said:


> Does any body have some recent check station data that we could compare the NW13 next to the rest of the nlp? I would be interested to see some data
> This is all I have so far I am trying to get the rest of the NW13


Of course I do, doesn't everyone keep copies of that data? LoL......


----------



## dc3shcmanke

WOW studies from Utah, Idaho, Colorado etc. This is funny! Whats next some data from tests performed in Europe??? Out with the old & and in with the new! APR are coming like it or not.


----------



## spikekilla

Maybe after all of the brilliant minds find a way to control natures creatures to fit their likings they can get to work on controlling the weather next...


----------



## 357Maximum

There's a good reason those crazy guys that wrote The Constitution and The Bill of Rights and a few other important things thought it best that someone be "invested" before they had a say in the lives of others. They made some great decisions that have been broken on purpose over the years. We are seeing the results of that each and everyday.

Socialism is here and fascism is coming whether you like it or not. This thread proves that plan is right on track.


----------



## dc3shcmanke

Let em Go let them Grow !!


----------



## hartman756

_I thought this was hilarious so I thought I would check out the NWMIQDMA I found this so I thought I would post it here in case people might want to respond
_
Once again you start with the ridicule and pretending you don't know and insinuating it is somehow made up.


----------



## hypox

357Maximum said:


> There's a good reason those crazy guys that wrote The Constitution and The Bill of Rights and a few other important things thought it best that someone be "invested" before they had a say in the lives of others. They made some great decisions that have been broken on purpose over the years. We are seeing the results of that each and everyday.
> 
> Socialism is here and fascism is coming whether you like it or not. This thread proves that plan is right on track.


I'm sure someone said the same thing the first time Michigan issued deer tags.


----------



## Craves

hartman756 said:


> You know why there is so much support for MARs in the NWLP on this thread? It has been brought to my attention that the QDMers have instructed all their followers on facebook to come over here and post positive things about the NWLP 13 !


Really? I never saw that.

Gotta go, my black helicopter just landed...


----------



## 357Maximum

I'm sure of it too Hypox.


----------



## Craves

357Maximum said:


> There's a good reason those crazy guys that wrote The Constitution and The Bill of Rights and a few other important things thought it best that someone be "invested" before they had a say in the lives of others. They made some great decisions that have been broken on purpose over the years. We are seeing the results of that each and everyday.
> 
> Socialism is here and fascism is coming whether you like it or not. This thread proves that plan is right on track.


Yep, protecting the MAJORITY of young bucks so they can see their SECOND birthday is a direct step to socialism & fascism...

You really can't make this stuff up!

And the beat goes on...


----------



## dc3shcmanke




----------



## Ranger Ray

Joe Archer said:


> Nice data Ranger Ray! It should make us stop and think. It kind of falls in line with Muenster's small sample that demonstrated a decline in total buck harvest, and my concern that harvest rates may decline.
> I wrote -
> _"*To me the bottom line when evaluating the success/failure of APR's in this region will be the observed change (if any) in harvest rate. If winter severity, more pressure on doe, and limits on bucks results in a significantly lower overall harvest rate; hunters might be inclined to not support APR's. If harvest rate remains constant AND you see an increase in the age of bucks harvested - most would (or should) support this. *_
> *If CWD or bTB show up - its a deal breaker".*
> The initial tick in "improvement in age class of bucks" appears to revert due mostly to a decrease in fawn recruitment. If you think about it, this makes total sense. If you do nothing to increase carrying capacity (as a defined proponent of QDM), increase pressure on doe, change the sex ratio to a more even 1:1 buck to doe - sooner or later recruitment will predictably decline. That is one of the main things that bothers me when people refer to APR's as QDM - they are NOT!
> This doesn't even throw in the effect of a couple of severe winters...
> <----<<<


Thanks Joe. You post science, the refute is, its not from whitetails in Michigan. Of course if it met their ideology it would be a different story. Like the matrix to advance age structure is different in Western whitetail or mule deer, Elk in Montana, and Moose in Alaska, not. They are welcome to post up science to refute the western findings, by the responses, they sure aren't making a very good case to refute it.

And the beat goes on......


----------



## brushbuster

Craves said:


> Really? I never saw that.
> 
> Gotta go, my black helicopter just landed...


I never did either, there are several qdm facebook pages out there for Michigan. I am in a private group and a few public groups just haven't seen it yet. Even if it does exist I still find it hilarious. Post all the pics you got boys as well as any check station data for both non APR NLP counties and APR NLP counties


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

Ranger Ray said:


> Thanks Joe. You post science, the refute is, its not from whitetails in Michigan. Of course if it met their ideology it would be a different story. Like the matrix to advance age structure is different in Western whitetail or mule deer, Elk in Montana, and Moose in Alaska, not.
> 
> And the beat goes on......


Kinda like if it meets your ideology then it must make sense.

Pot meet kettle!


----------



## Ranger Ray

At least I present science, show me yours. 

And the beat goes on....


----------



## Munsterlndr

brushbuster said:


> yeah I guess I don't put much faith in a aging system that isn't 100% accurate.


Which aging system is that? Hint, it's not the DNR looking at teeth at a check station, the accuracy of that method is kind of scary if you are looking for accuracy.


----------



## brushbuster

Munsterlndr said:


> station


My understanding is that there are 2 methods, the jaw bone method and the method where they disect the incisors and count the rings (cementum?) One method is more accurate but neither are 100%


----------



## Munsterlndr

brushbuster said:


> My understanding is that there are 2 methods, the jaw bone method and the method where they disect the incisors and count the rings (cementum?) One method is more accurate but neither are 100%


Yes, Annuli cementum is the method where incisors are sectioned. The other method is called TRW (Tooth wear and replacement) which is the visual method that the DNR is employing at check stations. Both methods are fairly accurate when aging fawns & yearlings and bucks up to 2.5 years old. After that age class, accuracy drops off with both methods and by the time you get to the 3.5 year age class, both methods have under 65% accuracy rates. 

Might want to keep that in mind when looking at check station data and increases in age classes, given that about a third of the time they get it wrong past 2.5 years old.


----------



## hypox

beer and nuts said:


> page 10 to now page 30, since your post soooooo, a 66% increase


I hope you didn't do the counting...:16suspect


----------



## swampbuck

Uncle Boopoo said:


> One major difference is they're not handing antlerless tags out like candy in the NW12. They did bump the quotas up a little but not really enough to notice. It's still not a guarantee to get one for private land in Lake Co and getting more than 1 is almost unheard of. It's been that way for several years now. I've been getting one every year that they have been available but haven't filled that tag since 2011.


You may want to check the harvest data. I looked at lake and Wexford a couple days ago....and for harvest is rising even faster than buck harvest is falling.


----------



## DirtySteve

Ranger Ray said:


> No.
> 
> I believe the DNR should manage by sound science, with social considerations in mind. The DNR making the decision on MAPR's would have been the proper way to solve this issue. However, without the science to back them making it mandatory, they selected a poll of a few to be a deciding factor. If they want to let the people decide game management, then it needs to be within a check and balance system, with all that participate having an equal chance at a vote. I have seen the system manipulated, and yes, it can be. Did they manipulate the deer MAPR issue, I have no idea. I will leave that to those that participated to decide, as I wasn't involved enough in it to know.



I believe the DNR would like to impose APR'S for a temporary period of time to collect some sound science on how it would affect a michigan deer herd. The issue with that is the DNR director is an appointed position. This is a touchy subject with the public (just look how popular this thread is). The survey was a way to try to do something that they would like to.......but the DNR management isn't going to stick their neck out to do it. That is why the 65% in favor rule came about.


----------



## Munsterlndr

DirtySteve said:


> I believe the DNR would like to impose APR'S for a temporary period of time to collect some sound science on how it would affect a michigan deer herd. The issue with that is the DNR director is an appointed position. This is a touchy subject with the public (just look how popular this thread is). The survey was a way to try to do something that they would like to.......but the DNR management isn't going to stick their neck out to do it. That is why the 65% in favor rule came about.


Do actually know any of the history as to how the survey process came to be?

You might want to read up on it, it has nothing to do with the reasons that you speculate on above.


----------



## brushbuster

beer and nuts said:


> I didn't do anything. It's just funny Hartman makes reference and gets lambasted and the it turns out, yup it was posted on website!! Not bad though page 10 to now page 30, since your post soooooo, a 66% increase, hell according to dnr survey....that's a super majority increase!!!


As KPC use to say, and now mbrewer says it, "your perception is your reality" lol.


----------



## DirtySteve

Munsterlndr said:


> Do actually know any of the history as to how the survey process came to be?
> 
> You might want to read up on it, it has nothing to do with the reasons that you speculate on above.


So you are saying the DNR had a survey to do something that they weren't interested in doing?


----------



## Munsterlndr

DirtySteve said:


> So you are saying the DNR had a survey to do something that they weren't interested in doing?


I'm suggesting that you don't know what the hell you are talking about and if you are interested, you may want to read up on the matter. 

Somewhat ironically, you stumbled into the truth with that last question, The genesis of the APR (formerly QDM) surveys came about at the request of the NRC, not the DNR. It all started back in 1997...........


----------



## 83mulligan

Ranger Ray said:


> Did you read the study? I left no info out. If there was no info on your concern in what I posted and linked to, it was the biologists that left it out. Seeing how they are the professionals, their lack of mentioning your concerns tells me something. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion on what the professionals may have overlooked, if such is the case. Myself, I would find it hard to believe the scientists would have totally ignored this "left out info" as they would be dealing with it. Oh and the fact that when they restricted season or hunters, they saw prolonged success. This wouldn't have happened under your "tanking theory."


I'm not exactly sure where the answer lies, but I know a fair amount about cwd and I know that the mule deer herd has been declining significantly out west for a couple of decades. The decline is in some part due to cwd, but, like i mentioned, not all of it can be linked to cwd and there is no consensus answer for the rest of it. So, to say APRs will not work in Michigan because they were not effective in the western states on an entirely different animal whose population is in a situation critical nosedive is just not a fair comparison. If you want to post some data on its success or failure in northern state whitetail deer population, then I'm all ears. I do agree with you that everyone who buys a license should have the opportunity to vote on the matter.


----------



## bucko12pt

Captain of the 4-C's said:


> I think far too many people in favor of APR are being too short sighted. Once you institute APR for the entire state - one can easily predict that in two or three decades, the overall quality of bucks being harvested (in terms of Boone and Crockett points) is guaranteed to decline throughout the entire state. The issue is that hunters will harvest bucks than meet the requirements and these bucks will have the tendency to be the "better" Boone and Crockett scorers - thereby reducing the ratio of "prime" breeders to the ratio of "subprime" older bucks. In southern Michigan - I see enough 4+ on one side 1.5 year old deer that you know this is just going to happen. I also get the fact you cannot "judge" the quality of a spike buck at 1.5 years - however, you can judge that an 8 point at 1.5 is "more than likely" going to be of better quality than the "average" spike buck at 1.5.
> 
> You can criticize me all you want - but if you understand genetics and hunter tendencies - you know this will happen eventually. In the short term - APR's - look fantastic and is also guaranteed to raise the average age of bucks in Michigan - but long term - expect the increase in "inferior" antler development.


We're nearly 15 years into the APR in Leelanau County and none if that us being seen here. Quite the opposite, the quality if the herd has gotten better and better every year.


----------



## bucko12pt

mustang72 said:


> Wow! It sure is nice to see all the support for Aprs! The results are looking good but we still have a ways to go. There were some guys (Tony and Jim to name a few) in this state that worked their ass's off to get this started and tried to get the lower aprs passed but it came up short of the super majority. We got a vote coming up in a couple years to make this thing more permanent so get out there and talk to your friends, neighbors the guys that have been on the fence their the ones that are going to help get this state turned around. As someone already said don't wasted to much time on the ones that wont change their minds. We can do this we just need to stand strong as hunters and use our vote to make a change for the better!


To give credit where credit is due, the guys that should be thanked for the current state of affairs regarding APR's in Michigan is a small group of hunters from Leelanau County, most of which have never visited, or posted on this website. Thank god they didn't, so they never listened to the naysayers that have been proven wrong, over and over, at every step of the process.


----------



## GRUNDY

I would have to agree with the western mule deer data being skewed. I've read for most of my adult life that the western mule deer population has been in a mysterious decline for some time now. Its no surprise that attempting to impose APR there would not affect the same results as if it were impose on MI whitetails.

I do have some trouble in my head (pun intended) with the concept of a 3pt on one side rule. I do feel there is some risk of simply making the 6pt buck what the current spike buck is now. I'm not a biologist, so I do not fully understand the benefit of an older age structure deer herd. So far most of the posts on here seem to be of emotional substance and not true scientific origin.

It is comical to me how Munster can ask the question about how facebook photos may be skewing people's perception of the NW12/13, and the thread turns into this circus.

The only thing I am more sure of after following 31 pages of this stuff, is that I now have more resolve to never set up a facebook account and that facebook could quite possibly be the devil, although I've considered purchasing the stock...


----------



## poz

One thing about boots on the ground that i have seen in Lake county is that the number of hunters has increased. Lake county was way over hunted and too many deer were taken. It's been below carrying capacity for a long time. The deer camps went from many to just a few. It went from 2 to 3 camps on every 2 tract to 1 to 2 camps on every 10 two tracts. Probably saw a 90% decline from the hey days of the 80's and 90's. It made it easier for bucks to make it through the hunting season. And with Maprs added, most of the deer the hunters saw the first year of Maprs were off limits. So of course with low hunter numbers and a growing deer population due to Maprs, you will get older nicer bucks. *But the real test will be, if and when the hunter numbers increase, will it go back to them shooting the first legal deer they see, or will they have restaint and eat tag soup. If people who now complain about guys shooting spikes and 4 points, can't pass 6 points and basket 8's, then all this hype about what Maprs are accomplishing will just have to go out the window. time will tell*


----------



## GettinBucky

Munsterlndr said:


> Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The fact that I've hunted under mandatory APR's in one of the NW13 counties for over 10 years certainly gives me some perspective on their impact, as well as owning property and hunting in two other of the NW12 counties. You don't seem to want to comment on the "upswing" in older bucks taken in the non-APR northern Michigan counties, what is that upswing due to?


It's because of the voluntary APRs.....lots of people are passing Young's by choice. In my opinion...good things are coming to Michigan. The younger guys are "getting it".


----------



## Ranger Ray

GRUNDY said:


> I would have to agree with the western mule deer data being skewed. I've read for most of my adult life that the western mule deer population has been in a mysterious decline for some time now. Its no surprise that attempting to impose APR there would not affect the same results as if it were impose on MI whitetails.


Yet when they removed hunting pressure, the deer mysteriously were able to buck this mysterious decline. And the fact the first couple years of APR's many states saw an increase then declined after a few years, would be no less an anomaly in this mysterious decline. Not buying it. Good excuse though just to dismiss the science.


----------



## 83mulligan

Ranger Ray said:


> Yet when they removed hunting pressure, the deer mysteriously were able to buck this mysterious decline. And the fact the first couple years of APR's many states saw an increase then declined after a few years, would be no less an anomaly in this mysterious decline. Not buying it. Good excuse though just to dismiss the science.


Maybe some reading would help:

https://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/National-Wildlife/Animals/Archives/2015/Mule-Deer.aspx

The Mule Deer population has been on a steady decline for decades. Mule Deer and Whitetail deer in Michigan share one thing in common. The word Deer follows their name. How can you expect to advance the age structure of a deer herd when you can't even figure out how to stabilize the overall population of a deer herd? It's a serious problem out west and perhaps when the APRs were introduced out there they didn't realize that they had a much bigger issue on their hands, which was the health of the herd in general. The SCIENCE you crave is on display. Do some research and you'll find out that sustaining a herd of Mule Deer at all is the real issue. No longer is the goal improving hunter satisfaction.


----------



## swampbuck

The mule deer shares more than the word deer, it is a whitetail/blacktail crossbreed. I wonder if that plays a factor in the decline


----------



## 357Maximum

Craves said:


> Original...I like that!
> 
> You wrote a lot about freedoms & rights in the past pertaining to APRs.
> 
> So tell me, do you support 357Maximum's assertion that those of us that would like to see the MAJORITY of bucks see their SECOND birthday are socialists & fascists?



Did it hurt when I made you think? 


Here this guy kinda sorta predicted me in this article maybe we should all heed his words a bit eh. His name sounds familiar but I cannot place him.

http://www.realtree.com/brow-tines-and-backstrap/antler-point-restrictions-are-we-being-honest


----------



## Munsterlndr

bowdrie said:


> Will this no doubt enlightening "monograph" detail the reasons behind your lack of deer sightings this year as well in Leelanau County?


You will have to wait and see. You can take a page out of one of your buddies books and contact me with a fake name & email address asking for a copy, when it's done.


----------



## bowdrie

Munsterlndr said:


> You will have to wait and see. You can take a page out of one of your buddies books and contact me with a fake name & email address asking for a copy, when it's done.


Look forward to it. No need to forward me a copy I will just grab it out of the recycle bin from one of my farmer/orchardist friends.


----------



## Munsterlndr

bowdrie said:


> from one of my farmer/orchardist friends.


Hopefully you are not associating with any who are members of, as another of your friends put it, "the greatest anti-deer hunting force in the state". Hanging out with those dudes might hurt your street cred.........


----------



## TreeDizzle

Munsterlndr said:


> Words have meanings.
> 
> The NRC is not the DNR, two completely different entities.
> 
> The DNR Director didn't have the option of approving a survey or implementing stakeholder QDM/APR procedures, he is told what to do by the NRC. The NRC is the body that instigated putting stakeholder QDM/APR procedures into place. They did so because of pressure from Sportsmens groups, not from the DNR, not from the Director of the DNR, not from biologists within the DNR. The DNR was not "pushing" for a rule change when the procedures were put into place.
> 
> I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just setting the record straight so that all of the other people reading this thread know what the reality behind the 66% percentage is, instead of the fiction that you are suggesting.



Thanks for setting the record straight...we are all fascinated by your supremacy! 

Why do you bother trying to convince people, myself included, who have logged thousands of hours in the stand, hunting the same tract of land in the NW13, that we are not seeing benefits from the APR's?? After all, we are the ones seeing and logging our deer sightings, studying the thousands of trail cam photos and harvesting the deer. It doesn't take social media to convince me that the change is for the better. Remember, hunting pressure and poor hunting trumps all other factors. My neighbor can be hunting 100 yds away and have terrible hunting over the past 3 year(which is true) and we are having incredible success 100 yds away. Coincidentally, we are not over hunting and over-pressuring our property. Obviously, he and I have two different perspectives on APRs, but APR's aren't necessarily there to influence success, just opportunity.


----------



## Munsterlndr

TreeDizzle said:


> Why do you bother trying to convince people, myself included, who have logged thousands of hours in the stand, hunting the same tract of land in the NW13, that we are not seeing benefits from the APR's??


Why do you make stuff up and attribute things to me that I have never said or done?

I posed a question about the validity of pics of big bucks posted on social media as being held up as "proof" that APR's are working, based on similar pics being posted on social media from Non-APR counties. Nowhere did I try and convince you are anyone else who has personal experience hunting in the NW13 that their observations are wrong. Sorry, didn't happen, totally inaccurate interpretation of anything that I've said in this or other threads. 

Instead of posting invective filled rants based on falsehoods, why don't you just answer the question posed as to an explanation for the seemingly increased numbers of older larger bucks posted on social media from non-APR counties?


----------



## Ranger Ray

83mulligan said:


> Are you suggesting we need a lottery for hunting bucks in Michigan?


No I am not. It absolutely works for creating big bucks though. It was just used to point to the fact the deer were able to increase under this "mystery decline" argument. Pointing to the fact, this "mystery decline" was a non issue to the mule deer APR studies and in fact a separate dynamic. Reason would tell one if the deer were biologically healthy enough to advance in age and rack development under reduced hunter to deer ratios, they were biologically healthy enough to do the same under APR's. There was another dynamic effecting advancement then health. Funny how that works. That is explained in the studies.

I will go on record though, that along with a one buck restriction, it will be brought up in a future push by pro APR interest groups as the next step to APR's. Why? Because after the first couple years the dynamics will revert backward a bit in the antler and age development, as those scientific mule deer studies showed, APR's will eventually revert to minimal effect. To really advance age structure, hunter to deer ratios will come up as a further restriction to an end to a philosophical means, big bucks.

I think I have made my point clear. If you would like to present any science to refute that which I presented, I'd be more than glad to read it. Oh, and I have no reason not to believe the mule deer is on the decline because of loss of habitat, climate change, etc... as the scientists state in your link.


----------



## TreeDizzle

Munsterlndr said:


> Why do you make stuff up and attribute things to me that I have never said or done?
> 
> I posed a question about the validity of pics of big bucks posted on social media as being held up as "proof" that APR's are working, based on similar pics being posted on social media from Non-APR counties. Nowhere did I try and convince you are anyone else who has personal experience hunting in the NW13 that their observations are wrong. Sorry, didn't happen, totally inaccurate interpretation of anything that I've said in this or other threads.
> 
> Instead of posting invective filled rants based on falsehoods, why don't you just answer the question posed as to an explanation for the seemingly increased numbers of older larger bucks posted on social media from non-APR counties?


It's seems your original question has been lost in the weeds of meaningless facts. There are an incredible amount of factors that cannot be proven, that can lead to possible answers to your question. 

Have hunters migrated to the NW13 counties in search of better hunting and left the other counties with less hunting pressure?

Have people witnessed with their own eyes that passing a 1.5 old can lead to larger, more mature bucks in the years to come?

Have trailcam pictures caused people to hold out in search of the better bucks in the area?

Could the herds just be on the upswing in that particular county?

Great acorn crops the past few years?

If agriculture in the area, was corn cut early?

You question is very open ended and my guess is that you would never be pleased with anyone's answer.


----------



## Munsterlndr

TreeDizzle said:


> It's seems your original question has been lost in the weeds of meaningless facts. There are an incredible amount of factors that cannot be proven, that can lead to possible answers to your question.
> 
> Have hunters migrated to the NW13 counties in search of better hunting and left the other counties with less hunting pressure?
> 
> Have people witnessed with their own eyes that passing a 1.5 old can lead to larger, more mature bucks in the years to come?
> 
> Have trailcam pictures caused people to hold out in search of the better bucks in the area?
> 
> Could the herds just be on the upswing in that particular county?
> 
> Great acorn crops the past few years?
> 
> If agriculture in the area, was corn cut early?
> 
> You question is very open ended and my guess is that you would never be pleased with anyone's answer.


All reasonable possibilities worthy of discussion. Many could apply equally both within and outside of the NW13, which is also worthy of discussion. In fact the possibility that there are a number of factors working in concert to account for an apparent increase in the number, size and age of bucks pictured on social media this year is a very realistic one. 

Which kind of calls into question the claim made by some that there is only one reason for the changes which some are observing within the NW12 but they don't seem to want to talk about that apparent contradiction.


----------



## DirtySteve

Munsterlndr said:


> Words have meanings.
> 
> The NRC is not the DNR, two completely different entities.
> 
> The DNR Director didn't have the option of approving a survey or implementing stakeholder QDM/APR procedures, he is told what to do by the NRC. The NRC is the body that instigated putting stakeholder QDM/APR procedures into place. They did so because of pressure from Sportsmens groups, not from the DNR, not from the Director of the DNR, not from biologists within the DNR. The DNR was not "pushing" for a rule change when the procedures were put into place.
> 
> I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just setting the record straight so that all of the other people reading this thread know what the reality behind the 66% percentage is, instead of the fiction that you are suggesting.



I beleive you are trying to convince me....otherwise you wouldn't have written paragraphs refuting my personal beliefs. 

I have already addressed the fact that the NRC and DNR have two different meanings. I explained lumped them together for convience sake in my statement. 

The NRC is an appointed panel that answers to the governer. The DNR Director is an appointed position also hand picked by the governer. The NRC sets policy. The director of DNR does not report to NRC. He answers to the governer and only the governer for his actions. 

The idea that some group like qdma can influence a commission like the NRC or the DNR the way you portray it is laughable. If you really think that opinion of the director of DNR and the biologists on his staff were not heavily considered in the process I am giving your ability of rational reasoning way too much credit. They didn't just go along with a few sportsman's groups willy nilly without serious considerations. 

Back to my beliefs and original point in all of this......regardless of who originally brought up APR'S the dept of natural resources and their team of biologists were in favor of trying APR'S. I will go out on a limb and say the NRC was also most likely in favor or they wouldnt have considered the idea after heavy debate. The reason we had the 66% rule was because the people making the final decisions on policy were aware that this is controversial issue and they hold appointed positions that they didn't want to lose.

I argue that the DNR and the NRC wanted APR'S when they sent this to a survey. If not then why have a survey? If they thought it was a bad idea they would have dismissed it.


----------



## soggybtmboys

Munsterlndr said:


> Why do you make stuff up and attribute things to me that I have never said or done?
> 
> I posed a question about the validity of pics of big bucks posted on social media as being held up as "proof" that APR's are working, based on similar pics being posted on social media from Non-APR counties. Nowhere did I try and convince you are anyone else who has personal experience hunting in the NW13 that their observations are wrong. Sorry, didn't happen, totally inaccurate interpretation of anything that I've said in this or other threads.
> 
> Instead of posting invective filled rants based on falsehoods, why don't you just answer the question posed as to an explanation for the seemingly increased numbers of older larger bucks posted on social media from non-APR counties?


In 2009, there was a depressed harvest of roughly 25%. This particular year it was by and largely due to the oceans of standing corn in October, November and December due to a very wet Oct and part of November. This occurrance was largely affecting agricultural areas in the SLP all over. In 2010 we saw a good harvest of bucks that year, but a noticeable difference was in the ages that were harvested, there was a significant uptick in the 2.5 yr old buck kill and some 3.5 yr olds. I believe there were discussion on that phenom back then. Everyone pretty much agreed that the standing corn was a big contributing fact to a less than spectacular success on deer seasons, especially when it cam to buck harvest.

The corn in effect acted a shield and a preventative to the buck harvest that year, so it was very plausible and it did show that the 2.5 yr old harvest was improved in 2010, everyone agreed. The corn was responsible for a good number of 1.5 yr olds making it to their 2.5 yr old birthday. The corn acted much like an APR does, it protected 1.5 yr olds.

Last season, we saw a great deal of standing corn thru much ag land in the SLP during prime hunting seasons and into gun season. Trending hunting practices in non apr areas are also taking hold. It would certainly offer plenty of reason why non APR areas are having good fortunes this year. However, in any case, this does not detract from the NW13 and what APRs are certainly accounting for there. NELP has been producing better bucks every year and they are under a soft APR, HC....and in those areas too, many hunters are practicing selective harvesting of bucks.

APR's are working as designed, and other factors including voluntary APR by hunters in non APR areas, as well as standing corn are saving more 1.5 yr old bucks. The improvements are showing, and there are alot more happy hunters all over the State because of them. Some hunters, as has been mentioned in this very thread are even coming home to hunt instead of out of state. These are all positive things, despite the nay sayers and negative Nancy spinsters say, or try and backstroke out of.

Pressure for better buck hunting is only going to build and mount, new buck hunting regulations via APR across the entire LP, is but only a matter of time. 

Have a wonderful Thanksgiving, 

And remember, Let them Go, Let them Grow


----------



## TreeDizzle

Munsterlndr said:


> All reasonable possibilities worthy of discussion. Many could apply equally both within and outside of the NW13, which is also worthy of discussion. In fact the possibility that there are a number of factors working in concert to account for an apparent increase in the number, size and age of bucks pictured on social media this year is a very realistic one.
> 
> Which kind of calls into question the claim made by some that there is only one reason for the changes which some are observing within the NW12 but they don't seem to want to talk about that apparent contradiction.


I cannot disagree. All I can prove is what I have experienced. On our 200 acres in the NW13, we have not had an acorn crop in 4 years due to poor spring weather and frosts. The past two winters have been difficult for the deer herd. Our predator population has exploded, numerous sightings of large bobcats and coyotes. An incredible amount of black bear photos on trailcams, we have seen a few while hunting and have two confirmed dens on our property. No agriculture within 5 miles. Hunting pressure is about the same, possible a few more hunters. What we have witnessed is less shots. People now have to confirm before they shoot.

With all of those factors negatively impacting the deer herd, we have witnessed the caliber of our bucks improve steadily over the years. More 2.5+ yr olds bucks and much larger racks than we have ever seen.

Also, we established voluntary APR's on our property 2 years before the mandatory APRs were established


----------



## Munsterlndr

DirtySteve said:


> The idea that some group like qdma can influence a commission like the NRC or the DNR the way you portray it is laughable.


Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Sorry if that hurts your feelings but It's simply a fact.

The above quote simply highlights your naivete. I'm curious, have you ever been to a NRC meeting or spoken in front of them? Ever been involved in an effort to change regulations in Michigan? Even lobbied the NRC for policy changes? I have to believe the answer to all of those is no. If you had, you would know that your statement quoted above is what is laughable, not the idea that stakeholder groups have no influence in changing regulations and policies governing wildlife in this state.


----------



## brushbuster

Well, I don't know how far fetched this theory will sound, but, the 1 thing that the APR NWLP bucks have in common with the non APR NLP bucks is age. One thing we know for sure the age structure is advancing in the NWLP APR region. (Let more little ones go the result will be more older bucks) I Think we can agree on that. So why are there older bucks in the non APR zone 2? Has there been a significant drop in hunters in that region? The last few years we have heard people complaining about the low deer densities in that region, Did many stop coming up here?. We had some a harsh winter 2 years ago . And an early snow fall at the beginning of last year restricting access to hunters. Those are high possibilities as to why the age structure advanced in the non apr region. Will it happen next year? Not a very constant variable, I kinda doubt we will see the same harvest results in the Non APR zone 2 region. I am quite sure though that we will continue to see age advancements where there are regulations in place that insure that.
Meh Just some musings.


----------



## 83mulligan

Ranger Ray said:


> No I am not. It absolutely works for creating big bucks though. It was just used to point the fact the deer were able to increase under this "mystery decline" argument. Pointing to the fact, this "mystery decline" was a non issue to the mule deer APR studies and in fact a separate dynamic. Reason would tell one if the deer were biologically healthy enough to advance in age in rack development under reduced hunter to deer ratios, they were biologically healthy enough to do the same under APR's. There was another dynamic effecting advancement then health. Funny how that works. That is explained in the studies.
> 
> I will go on record though, that along with a one buck restriction, it will be brought up in a future push by pro APR interest groups as the next step to APR's. Why? Because after the first couple years the dynamics will revert backward a bit in the antler and age development, as those scientific mule deer studies showed, APR's will eventually revert to minimal effect. To really advance age structure, hunter to deer ratios will come up as a further restriction to an end to a philosophical means, big bucks.
> 
> I think I have made my point clear. If you would like to present any science to refute that which I presented, I'd be more than glad to read it. Oh, and I have no reason not to believe the mule deer is on the decline because of loss of habitat, climate change, etc... as the scientists state in your link.


No doubt, reducing the number of hunters or reducing the number of bucks killed will help promote an older age structure. I'd be for a one buck rule and a mandatory APR in all zones. But I'll admit, It's because I would like a better opportunity to shoot bigger bucks which may be a selfish reason, but its where I"m personally when it comes to deer hunting in Michigan.


----------



## 83mulligan

beer and nuts said:


> You have seen the pictures of mule deer roaming western neighborhoods right? They due adapt very good, especially wintering grounds. Edmonton, ca bow zone has absolute huge urban mulies. Just recently seen 3 different youtube vids of mulies battling it out in western neighborhoods, yards and driveways shared on FB pages.


Open a hunting season in those neighborhoods and see how the population and age structure fares. I don't think "park deer" vs wild deer is a good indicator of adaptability by a species. I'd say that a 30 to 40 percent decline in overall numbers is.


----------



## DirtySteve

Munsterlndr said:


> Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Sorry if that hurts your feelings but It's simply a fact.
> 
> The above quote simply highlights your naivete. I'm curious, have you ever been to a NRC meeting or spoken in front of them? Ever been involved in an effort to change regulations in Michigan? Even lobbied the NRC for policy changes? I have to believe the answer to all of those is no. If you had, you would know that your statement quoted above is what is laughable, not the idea that stakeholder groups have no influence in changing regulations and policies governing wildlife in this state.



Been to an NRC meeting the answer is no. I have been to some DNR informational meetings and watched the ones available online. I have written congressional leaders twice in my life that I can recall over legislation that affects sportsman. I did however apply for a position on the NRC under Snyder just to see what his response would be.....I never got one. Not that I should have. I am in no way qualified.

Personally I am not aware of an issue with NRC that has upset me enough to travel to a meeting and present. I am one of the few that believes our resources are very well managed. I am pleased with the overall performance of the NRC and the DNR.

For the record I am not sure if I am for or against APR'S yet. I have always always been able to understand both sides of this issue. I will be fine with or without them. Won't affect my hunting habbits one bit either way. I will say I would welcome a trial period for the entire state as I am not against change.....but I am also ok with waiting for results of the trial period in the NW13.


----------



## Munsterlndr

DirtySteve said:


> Been to an NRC meeting the answer is no.


It's something worth experiencing at least once and I say that to every hunter in Michigan, not just to you. It will give you some perspective on how the NRC and the DNR interact and also how wildlife policy is actually crafted in this state. I've been going to NRC meetings for the last ten years or so and have been involved in a number of efforts to change regulations (including crossbow legalization). The fact is that very small groups can have an incredible amount of influence on changing policy in this state, a fact that is realized by the dozens of people from a variety of organizations who take the time every month to attend the meetings and make presentations to the DNR. The NRC is a political body, like any political body they are influenced by their constituents, particularly those constituents who are vocal and who are organized. There is a reason that guys from the Hunters & Trappers Org., QDMA, WTF, B.A.S.S. Nation, TU and a bunch of other groups are at those meetings, gripping & grinning with the Commissioners and with the upper levels of DNR management every month and it's not just because they are looking for something to do on Thursday afternoons.


----------



## QDMAMAN

Munsterlndr said:


> There is a reason that guys from the Hunters & Trappers Org., QDMA, WTF, B.A.S.S. Nation, TU and a bunch of other groups are at those meetings, gripping & grinning with the Commissioners and with the upper levels of DNR management every month and it's not just because they are looking for something to do on Thursday afternoons.


Who's your favorite grip-n-grin Jim?


----------



## 357Maximum

Craves said:


> Just to make sure we are clear, it is your belief that those of us that would like to see the MAJORITY of bucks see their SECOND birthday are a bunch socialists & fascists?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes or no?



KINDA SIMILAR, not the SAME

A lot of them are unable to see beyond themselves and THEIR own desires. Most are willing to play subtraction in someone else's experience so that they can play addition to THEIR experience.


----------



## >WingIt<

[QUOTE="357Maximum, post: 5709769, member: 

A lot of them are unable to see beyond themselves and THEIR own desires. Most are willing to play subtraction in someone else's experience so that they can play addition to THEIR experience.[/QUOTE]

Do you not see how hypocritical this is....


----------



## brookie1

Hunting in general is extremely selfish in nature. When you kill at animal no one else gets to kill it. Kind of cuts through the BS, doesn't it?


----------



## >WingIt<

brookie1 said:


> Hunting in general is extremely selfish in nature. When you kill at animal no one else gets to kill it. Kind of cuts through the BS, doesn't it?


Exactly,
Two sides to this. Both selfish and both limit the other in one way or another


----------



## 357Maximum

>WingIt< said:


> [QUOTE="357Maximum, post: 5709769, member:
> 
> A lot of them are unable to see beyond themselves and THEIR own desires. Most are willing to play subtraction in someone else's experience so that they can play addition to THEIR experience.


Do you not see how hypocritical this is....[/QUOTE]


I am happy enough with what I already got. Taking away someone elses opportunity may make me more happier indeed. I was not brought up to take away from someone else to increase my happiness however. Where is the hypocrisy again?




I am amazed that over 1,000,000 deerhunters are still willing to buy a license in this state if they are truly that unhappy. I am also amazed that people think they are going to get rich playing the lottery also. Maybe I am just easily amazed. 


I have basically been playing by the APR rules on my place for over a decade. I just happen to have a genetic clause in that contract with myself ( a clause that has been used very rarely) . Have I ever gone out of my way to make sure everyone in the world plays by my thoughts or my same "philosophy"? HELL NO

I congratulate everyone on what they felt good wrapping their tag around, whether I personally would have done the same thing or not. I am not trying to change what others do....YOU ARE



The guy that is sitting out there passing up 120 class animals might have a good basis IN HIS MIND to call me names though, cause I am going to shoot it if I get the chance.


----------



## DirtySteve

357Maximum said:


> Do you not see how hypocritical this is....





I have basically been playing by the APR rules on my place for over a decade. I just happen to have a genetic clause in that contract with myself ( a clause that has been used very rarely) . Have I ever gone out of my way to make sure everyone in the world plays by my thoughts or my same "philosophy"? HELL NO

I congratulate everyone on what they felt good wrapping their tag around, whether I personally would have done the same thing or not. I am not trying to change what others do....YOU ARE

[/QUOTE]

You seem to be a little over dramatic about this. This is only a simple modification to rules that we already have in place. They change the rules in all sorts of hunting and fishing regs from year to year. Bass and walleye fishing come to mind. Those regulations have changed many times in my lifetime.

We have gone from 1 buck rule in bow and 1 in archery to a 2 bucks in archery and 2 buck in rifle. Then we went to a 2 buck overall with a 4 point or better on one side for the second. The regs are diff everywhere now and people are starting to like the more stringent rules. If it gets changed it really isn't that big of a deal. I guarantee you one thing......it will most likely change again In your lifetime. 


Personally I am very against the 1 buck rule. That could happen too. I won't lose any sleep over it.


----------



## brushbuster

DirtySteve said:


> I have basically been playing by the APR rules on my place for over a decade. I just happen to have a genetic clause in that contract with myself ( a clause that has been used very rarely) . Have I ever gone out of my way to make sure everyone in the world plays by my thoughts or my same "philosophy"? HELL NO
> 
> I congratulate everyone on what they felt good wrapping their tag around, whether I personally would have done the same thing or not. I am not trying to change what others do....YOU ARE


You seem to be a little over dramatic about this. This is only a simple modification to rules that we already have in place. They change the rules in all sorts of hunting and fishing regs from year to year. Bass and walleye fishing come to mind. Those regulations have changed many times in my lifetime.

We have gone from 1 buck rule in bow and 1 in archery to a 2 bucks in archery and 2 buck in rifle. Then we went to a 2 buck overall with a 4 point or better on one side for the second. The regs are diff everywhere now and people are starting to like the more stringent rules. If it gets changed it really isn't that big of a deal. I guarantee you one thing......it will most likely change again In your lifetime. 


Personally I am very against the 1 buck rule. That could happen too. I won't lose any sleep over it.[/QUOTE]
Yup, rules change all the time, you either cry about it or you get over it. It's a big boy world we live in. lol


----------



## mbrewer

bowdrie said:


> Munster,
> 
> Wondering when we can expect another White Paper detailing what other factors have lead to the increase of older age class bucks in both the APR and Non-APR areas this year? I would be interested to compare this to your previous writings on the subject of APR's and there propensity to cause an increase in age structure where implemented and the corresponding disease and agricultural threats.


I'm not sure the reasons matter even if they could be quantified. Any data that suggests increased recruitment is good data. It can only help. APR will be credited or blamed for all factors affecting hunter satisfaction.

I hate to say it but I will, perception is reality. Happy people are tolerant and accepting. Unhappy, not so much.

P.S. It's OK to be happy but not yet satisfied. I am.


----------



## brushbuster

Very interesting.



http://timesleader.com/sports/495366/pennsylvania-establishing-itself-as-a-trophy-buck-state


----------



## mbrewer

DirtySteve said:


> You seem to be a little over dramatic about this. This is only a simple modification to rules that we already have in place. They change the rules in all sorts of hunting and fishing regs from year to year. Bass and walleye fishing come to mind. Those regulations have changed many times in my lifetime.
> 
> We have gone from 1 buck rule in bow and 1 in archery to a 2 bucks in archery and 2 buck in rifle. Then we went to a 2 buck overall with a 4 point or better on one side for the second. The regs are diff everywhere now and people are starting to like the more stringent rules. If it gets changed it really isn't that big of a deal. I guarantee you one thing......it will most likely change again In your lifetime.
> 
> 
> Personally I am very against the 1 buck rule. That could happen too. I won't lose any sleep over it.


People look for someone to blame when change they don't support is upon them. This process directs are attention towards each other. Not an ideal situation considering we "employ" subject matter experts to assume that responsibility for us.


----------



## 357Maximum

Rules for sound scientific reasons I have ZERO issue with. Never have...never will. 

Rules for social reasons that actually fly in the face of proven science...yeah I get a little emotional about. I will be the first to admit it.


I was raised in a family of killers. I stopped killing 4 bucks before they passed the law. I could see what 4 bucks being slaughtered were doing to the herd with my own eyes. I also went to school with kids that were not killing anything at all and darn me to heck for feeling a bit of empathy for them, but I did. It forever changed me. I am nowhere near the a$$hole I would like to be. Lack of empathy for others must surely make life easier....oh well I guess I will have to live with the empathy for others. 

I CHOSE to not hunt with family and friends that belittled me for that choice I made to not kill everything that you legally could. I basically lived out of a suitcase for 20 years of my life so I would not have to hunt with MY OWN FAMILY. When I got my place I started practicing my personal version of QDM way before it was what the cool kids were doing. I caught so much grief over that I simply cannot describe it. There is @$$holes on both sides of the coin let there be no doubt in that. So yeah when I see a law coming down the pipeline that has ZERO science for it and is only based on antler lust...I get a bit DRAMATIC. This law in time will lessen the experience of those that are not solely interested in antlers ...and it will do it for no good scientific reason. Excuse me for being dramatic if you can find it in your heart to do so. Just know that if I had less empathy for others, I would most likely be right there beside you hoisting the 180 inch buck flag. 

For the sake of those that simply like to hunt and eat meat and have a snowballs shot at a nice rack maybe if you are diligent ( lest call them the middle grounders) ... I pray to God that the experiment that has been thrust upon you is not met with a harsh winter or disease...............because then you will all lose pretty much everything. 

The "experiment" of protecting the weak and old has proven unsound scientifically since the dawn of evolution and I do not support it. But then I am probably am just being dramatic. 

Good Day and Happy Thanksgiving tomorrow...I hope you will give thanks for all you have and do a bit of reflection. But I know some of the Antlerphiles (of which I almost become while pushing back against family and friends) do not have that ability unfortunately. I almost was one of them myself....I get it even if you think I do not.


----------



## mbrewer

brushbuster said:


> Yup, rules change all the time, you either cry about it or you get over it. It's a big boy world we live in. lol


I liked this ^ because it's correct. Unfortunately, sometimes, crying over rules that haven't changed requires some maturity and acceptance as well.


----------



## brushbuster

mbrewer said:


> I liked this ^ because it's correct. Unfortunately, sometimes, crying over rules that haven't changed requires some maturity and acceptance as well.


I can agree with that, maybe some see striving to continue to change a rule the same as crying about a rule that hasn't changed, after all, perception is reality.


----------



## Ranger Ray

brushbuster said:


> I can agree with that, maybe some see striving to continue to change a rule the same as crying about a rule that hasn't changed, after all, perception is reality.


Huh? Too funny. Right.


----------



## bioactive

357Maximum said:


> I am amazed that over 1,000,000 deerhunters are still willing to buy a license in this state


They don't. It seems to me if you are going to argue so forcefully and with such an astonished attitude you might actually get your facts straight first.



357Maximum said:


> I have basically been playing by the APR rules on my place for over a decade. I just happen to have a genetic clause in that contract with myself ( a clause that has been used very rarely) .


No you haven't been playing under APR rules, not if you make up exceptions based on the flawed premise that you can tell the genetics of a young wild buck. You are simply killing whatever deer you want, and then saying you are practicing under APRs rules, which is untrue.


----------



## fanrwing

Got here late due to the fact that the last 2 weeks I've been hunting in the woods and not on the computer, I have noticed much of the same nonsense. It starts with the OP implication that because some large deer are being posted on the internet that APRs in the NW12 must be working. It continues with the idea that their is a marked increase in the number of large deer in that area and that soon people will be flocking to the NW12 to hunt. If we impose APRs statewide in a few years MI will be a deer hunting Mecca and not the laughing stock of the hunting world. 
Posting on the internet is new but community buck poles have been around for ever and unless there is a prize for the first deer hung or it's someones first deer they are generally big bucks. It proves nothing other than guys who get nice deer like to show them off.
Impossible to say that people in general are seeing and or getting bigger bucks just because some people say so. If people begin flocking to the NW12 I can only say, "Good Luck". Much of the public land is marginal at best for holding deer and the best hunting is on private land where as now you need to know someone or if it does become the go to spot be prepared to pay big $$ for a lease.
Guys you can continue to dream but changing a few regs. will not turn MI into Kansas, Iowa or where ever you think the promised land is. If that was so MI could adopt S. Dakota's regs and become a pheasant hot spot.
If you want personal observations I can tell you that at our camp of 8 hunters 3 years ago the year before APRs our group got 2 does, a 6 pt. an 8 pt. and a 10 pt. Last year the 2nd year of APRs the same guys on the same land got 2 does, 2 8 pts. and a 10 pt.. So not much has changed. This year we have taken 2 6 pts. and a small 10 pt. Overall the guys in our camp and those in the surrounding camps are seeing fewer deer and very few mature deer bucks or does. So can we say APRs are causing deer numbers to drop or is it more likely the back to back severe winters and increased number of coyotes.


----------



## mbrewer

Munsterlndr said:


> Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Sorry if that hurts your feelings but It's simply a fact.
> 
> The above quote simply highlights your naivete. I'm curious, have you ever been to a NRC meeting or spoken in front of them? Ever been involved in an effort to change regulations in Michigan? Even lobbied the NRC for policy changes? I have to believe the answer to all of those is no. If you had, you would know that your statement quoted above is what is laughable, not the idea that stakeholder groups have no influence in changing regulations and policies governing wildlife in this state.


All true in regards to politickin' the politicos. But I'll be darned if I know what the proper amount of influence is. Some is better than none but for some, too much is never enough.


----------



## 357Maximum

Bio

Did you miss the "basically"...which translated means kinda sorta to suit my ideas. I know genetics are not a factor...I read it right here, and trying to guess genetics make you a heretic of the utmost disdain...I get that. But I am just a greedy guy and cannot suppress the urge to kill teeny tiny antlers to make keychains holders out of ya know. They also make my 120 to 140 inch bucks on the wall look so much bigger to visitors.

This is another one of them times I wish I was capable of being more of an arse than I have the stomach for.

I took a drive through the local State Land on the 5th day of season....I think one half of that 1 million were right there...but then again I did not take my shoes off when I did the counting.

You hate my opinion.........I get that and I can live with that...no problem I will still sleep well tonight. This is America and for now we both have the right to our opinions.


----------



## 357Maximum

http://upnorthlive.com/news/local/l...an-deer-licenses-sold-in-six-years?id=1122534

This where I pulled the simple 1million number from...not that it matters.


----------



## mbrewer

brushbuster said:


> I can agree with that, maybe some see striving to continue to change a rule the same as crying about a rule that hasn't changed, after all, perception is reality.


Right, people can argue till there blue in the face and still not understand perfect opinions aren't perfect proof.

I got opinions, kick em, stomp em, call em names, but don't try and take em from me.


----------



## bucko12pt

I've lived and hunted in Leelanau Co all of my life. When we passed our APR 15 years ago, it took us a number of years, after the woods started filling with hunters, that perhaps we shouldn't advertise quite so hard about how good the hunting had become. 

For those living in the NW13, expect that if you post on MS, Facebook and all the other social media outlets, that you are advertising to everyone to come hunt where you are hunting. 
When your hunting area becomes overwhelmed with hunters, you only have yourself to blame. Good hunters will figure out that the hunting has improved. Good hunters aren't a problem, it's the weekend warriors that screw up the deer woods, let them figure it out on their own. 

Probably shouldn't make this post, but I will anyway.


----------



## bioactive

357Maximum said:


> Bio
> 
> You hate my opinion.........I get that and I can live with that...no problem I will still sleep well tonight. This is America and for now we both have the right to our opinions.


I don't hate your opinion, I simply think it is an uneducated excuse to kill yearlings. You gotta live with that, not me.

If you want to shoot a yearling, shoot one, but don't make up excuses and try to sell them to people who know better.

Wait 4 years and every single one of what you consider to be a "scrub" buck will be the buck of a lifetime for 9 out of 10 Michigan hunters. 

Just don't try to sell us the idea you are trying to do those guys a favor by getting rid of the lesser animals (in your opinion). 

Would this be a cull buck for you?


----------



## bioactive

fanrwing said:


> Guys you can continue to dream but changing a few regs. will not turn MI into Kansas, Iowa or where ever you think the promised land is.




Since nobody ever suggested we could make Michigan into Kansas or Ohio, what is your point exactly?

Seems like you are just making up that idea, which no-one involved in the APR efforts ever suggested, so that you will have a straw man to attack.

The goals of every MI APR that has been proposed were simply to pass more yearlings into the 2.5 and older age classes.

The only people who mention changing Michigan into Kansas are those who oppose APRs and want to discredit the credible efforts of others by making it look like they are over-reaching.

This is a pure straw man.


----------



## hartman756

_"Good hunters aren't a problem, it's the weekend warriors that screw up the deer woods,"_

I thought that that was a big part of the promotion for MARs ? That the sub par "weekend warrior" would be the ones to benefit the most from them. Now it is we need to keep them out of the area so the "good" hunters can have it to themselves??????? My how things change once someone gets what they wanted.............


----------



## Munsterlndr

bioactive said:


> Would this be a cull buck for you?


LoL, it wouldn't be cull buck for anyone since it lived it's life on a property where hunting was not allowed.


----------



## 2508speed

bucko12pt said:


> I've lived and hunted in Leelanau Co all of my life. When we passed our APR 15 years ago, it took us a number of years, after the woods started filling with hunters, that perhaps we shouldn't advertise quite so hard about how good the hunting had become.
> 
> For those living in the NW13, expect that if you post on MS, Facebook and all the other social media outlets, that you are advertising to everyone to come hunt where you are hunting.
> When your hunting area becomes overwhelmed with hunters, you only have yourself to blame. Good hunters will figure out that the hunting has improved. Good hunters aren't a problem, it's the weekend warriors that screw up the deer woods, let them figure it out on their own.
> 
> Probably shouldn't make this post, but I will anyway.


LOL! Just bring your money though!


----------



## 357Maximum

bioactive said:


> I don't hate your opinion, I simply think it is an uneducated excuse to kill yearlings. You gotta live with that, not me.
> 
> If you want to shoot a yearling, shoot one, but don't make up excuses and try to sell them to people who know better.
> 
> Wait 4 years and every single one of what you consider to be a "scrub" buck will be the buck of a lifetime for 9 out of 10 Michigan hunters.
> 
> Just don't try to sell us the idea you are trying to do those guys a favor by getting rid of the lesser animals (in your opinion).
> 
> 
> I told you they make great key ring hangers....who needs an excuse?
> 
> Would this be a cull buck for you?


I know the story of that buck...did you not read the other thread. DId not fall for it then either. Keep pitching, and pitcing and pitching...but but please know the batter done left the plate. He is going fishing instead.


----------



## cdacker

357Maximum said:


> I know the story of that buck...did you not read the other thread. DId not fall for it then either. Keep pitching, and pitcing and pitching...but but please know the batter done left the plate. He is going fishing instead.


In the other thread, if I recall correctly, you said you would shoot that buck.


----------



## 357Maximum

cdacker said:


> In the other thread, if I recall correctly, you said you would shoot that buck.



And I still would.. you obviously did not read the other thread carefully either. Granted I too find it hard keep up with the same basic thread going on in 3 places at once.


----------



## 2508speed

357Maximum said:


> And I still would.. you obviously did not read the other thread carefully either. Granted I too find it hard keep up with the same basic thread going on in 3 places at once.


You have been branded! You will forever be against big bucks in Michigan! LOL Dazed and fused! The best thing for the herd is to kill button bucks.


----------



## hypox

Come on, you would not shoot that deer.

Oct 1st you go out for a relaxing 3 hour evening hunt and that little scrapper comes walking right up to the base of your tree and is looking up sniffing the pegs you used to climb. He's batting his big bambi eyes at you and when he starts to walk away you just smoke him? 

I'm calling BS.


----------



## cdacker

357Maximum said:


> And I still would.. you obviously did not read the other thread carefully either. Granted I too find it hard keep up with the same basic thread going on in 3 places at once.


I did read it. You said you'd shoot him in a heartbeat. Gotta cull out those bad genes. Even though these are the traits he'd pass on


----------



## 357Maximum

2508speed said:


> You have been branded! You will forever be against big bucks in Michigan! LOL Dazed and fused! The best thing for the herd is to kill button bucks.



Yep. I have averaged one spike per decade I have hunted...call me the SPIKE SLAYER if you will, I will stand up and be counted PROUD.


----------



## 357Maximum

hypox said:


> Come on, you would not shoot that deer.
> 
> Oct 1st you go out for a relaxing 3 hour evening hunt and that little scrapper comes walking right up to the base of your tree and is looking up sniffing the pegs you used to climb. He's batting his big bambi eyes at you and when he starts to walk away you just smoke him?
> 
> I'm calling BS.


Change the date to November something and I would argue with you. That's all I am admitting to at this time.


----------



## plugger

2508speed said:


> You have been branded! You will forever be against big bucks in Michigan! LOL Dazed and fused! The best thing for the herd is to kill button bucks.


 Two bambis make a dandy!


----------



## hitechman

bioactive said:


> This will all be very simple in the end, and is not solvable until next year. When the numbers come out for age structure in the northwest 13, we will see a radical difference from the pre-APR years.
> 
> *I predict that for the 2015 season, the worst county in the NW 13 for yearling harvest (% yearlings among antlered bucks) will have better yearling harvest than the best county in any of the other NLP counties , and the worst county for 3.5 yo and older bucks in the NW 13 will have better results than the best county in the rest of the NLP*................................................


Any 5th grader could come up with that statement. Obviously, when yearling harvest is not legal (via APRs), a higher % of deer will be in an older age class. When yearling buck harvest is legal (due to the absence of APRs), the % of older age class deer taken will decrease.

What I want to see is NUMBERS, and not percents. I believe, in one of your posts, you stated that one outcome of APRs was that the total number of bucks harvested with APRs in place will be the same as it was with out them in the NW 12. It should be, since they are not harvested as yearlings, and will be harvested later (what 3-4-5 years?), and there will be more deer in the older age classes, since they lived to get there.

I'm not anti APR, and am willing to give it a chance, *but I do want the same % opportunity to harvest a buck as I had when APRs were not in effect*--I want to see as many big racks with APRs in effect as I saw small racks without them. For whatever reasons (probably 2 severe winters), that has yet to occur on my property (actually my brothers now, since he bought me out--but I have lifelong hunting privileges) in Mason County the last 3 years. I didn't hunt this year because of health reasons, but the 3 bow/gun hunters on the property have reported that things have not changed this year either..........very few deer sightings at all, and nothing bearing antlers was legal.

Steve


----------



## 357Maximum

cdacker said:


> I did read it. You said you'd shoot him in a heartbeat. Gotta cull out those bad genes. Even though these are the traits he'd pass on
> View attachment 197498


I stand by my legal decision to do what I do. I won't even mention the 30-40 nice 6 and 8 points I passed while that scrub was waiting to grow up. We already had that discussion.


----------



## hypox

Why would you not shoot a doe?


----------



## hitechman

hypox said:


> Why would you not shoot a doe?


This year, on my place in Mason County, that would have been 25% of the deer population! That's why!

Steve


----------



## 357Maximum

I shoot does occasionally. Nothing against it when it is needed. Right now in my area does simply do not need me killing them. I have neighbors that are really good at it and some even get special permits and apparently they see a lot more deer than what I see. This is totally non scientific...it is just me driving by their meat pole. When I get the urge or feel the need. I buy the tag and smoke one. When I learned all about sex it became very apparent very quick that it takes both a cow and a bull to make more of the same.


----------



## Munsterlndr

bioactive said:


> Since nobody ever suggested we could make Michigan into Kansas or Ohio, what is your point exactly?
> 
> Seems like you are just making up that idea, which no-one involved in the APR efforts ever suggested, so that you will have a straw man to attack.


No-one involved in the APR efforts has ever suggested that? Never, ever? Honest *****? None of the APR guys have ever said that Michigan could be just like Ohio if we just changed the Michigan mentality? Never? You know everything that has ever been said by everybody involved in the APR efforts? Wow, I have to say that's impressive, to have that kind of absolute knowledge of what hundreds if not thousands of other hunters have ever said..... Just wow!


----------



## DirtySteve

Munsterlndr said:


> No-one involved in the APR efforts has ever suggested that? Never, ever? Honest *****? None of the APR guys have ever said that Michigan could be just like Ohio if we just changed the Michigan mentality? Never? You know everything that has ever been said by everybody involved in the APR efforts? Wow, I have to say that's impressive, to have that kind of absolute knowledge of what hundreds if not thousands of other hunters have ever said..... Just wow!



I think we could be far better than Ohio. We could have nice bucks and actually hunt in a wilderness setting. We have far more public land and oportunity. Ohio is a lousy place to live or just hang out for a week.


----------



## bucko12pt

hartman756 said:


> _"Good hunters aren't a problem, it's the weekend warriors that screw up the deer woods,"_
> 
> I thought that that was a big part of the promotion for MARs ? That the sub par "weekend warrior" would be the ones to benefit the most from them. Now it is we need to keep them out of the area so the "good" hunters can have it to themselves??????? My how things change once someone gets what they wanted.............


Are your comprehension skills really that bad...........never mind, yeah I know they are.


----------



## fanrwing

bioactive said:


> Since nobody ever suggested we could make Michigan into Kansas or Ohio, what is your point exactly?
> 
> Seems like you are just making up that idea, which no-one involved in the APR efforts ever suggested, so that you will have a straw man to attack.
> 
> The goals of every MI APR that has been proposed were simply to pass more yearlings into the 2.5 and older age classes.
> 
> The only people who mention changing Michigan into Kansas are those who oppose APRs and want to discredit the credible efforts of others by making it look like they are over-reaching.
> 
> This is a pure straw man.


You obviously are a busy man so you have missed the many post and entire threads on how Mi could be just like or better than those other states like you missed posts, 22, 68, 344 and 347 here. In another thread you stated that if any of the pro APR guys was to bash older hunters you would speak up, so why your silence since posts 81 and 249. I have little interest in getting into a back and forth with you but it is you who has attacked me by suggesting that I have made up ideas. The point of my post was to point out that postings on the internet or hanging on buck poles proves nothing about APRs, of course anyone who knows as much about gathering data and facts as you claim to would know that.
There are posts about the wonderful reports coming from the NW12. I gave a "boots on the ground" report of an area of the NW12 where APRs don't seem to have made a difference.


----------



## TreeDizzle

Maybe it's just me, but complaining on the internet about poor hunting doesn't seem like it will solve much. Maybe your boots on the ground need to spend more time scouting, analyzing, and "hunting" the animal you are after. If bucks are allowed to see their 2nd birthday, they are certainly going to challenge hunters more, but for me I enjoy the challenge and pursuit. 

Happy Thanksgiving all!


----------



## poz

cdacker said:


> I did read it. You said you'd shoot him in a heartbeat. Gotta cull out those bad genes. Even though these are the traits he'd pass on
> View attachment 197498


But about 90% on here would shoot that deer if he was a 2.5 year old 7 pointer. so in fact about 90% of you would feel comfortable not letting that deer reach it's full potential, making you just like the guys who would shoot it as a spike. But for some reason you want laws to that will some how make you feel better that you stopped a guy from shooting it as a spike just so you can shoot it the following year. Pure Michigan. lol


----------



## mustang72

poz said:


> But about 90% on here would shoot that deer if he was a 2.5 year old 7 pointer. so in fact about 90% of you would feel comfortable not letting that deer reach it's full potential, making you just like the guys who would shoot it as a spike. But for some reason you want laws to that will some how make you feel better that you stopped a guy from shooting it as a spike just so you can shoot it the following year. Pure Michigan. lol


 What does Aprs have to do with full potential? This is not trophy management... It's just suppose to advance the age structure..but you know that.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/145631825470177/

Aprs show your support


----------



## poz

mustang72 said:


> What does Aprs have to do with full potential? This is not trophy management... It's just suppose to advance the age structure..but you know that.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/145631825470177/
> 
> Aprs show your support


Is your goal to advance the age structure by just one year, because that is all you are doing if you shoot most of the bucks you saved from the first year, the second year. or do you really want to advance the age structure. It's funny how someone posts a spike from a huge piece of property that hunting is not allowed and tries to sell it off as real world potential. The real change in Michigan will come when you don't need a mandatory law to protect most 1.5 year old. And when most hunters start voluntarily passing 2.5 year old. Until then, the actions of most hunters shooting 2.5 yr old deer is just as bad as shooting 1.5 yr old. when it comes to really making a change in the age structure... But you know that.


----------



## mustang72

poz said:


> Is your goal to advance the age structure by just one year, because that is all you are doing if you shoot most of the bucks you saved from the first year, the second year. or do you really want to advance the age structure. It's funny how someone posts a spike from a huge piece of property that hunting is not allowed and tries to sell it off as real world potential. The real change in Michigan will come when you don't need a mandatory law to protect most 1.5 year old. And when most hunters start voluntarily passing 2.5 year old. Until then, the actions of most hunters shooting 2.5 yr old deer is just as bad as shooting 1.5 yr old. when it comes to really making a change in the age structure... But you know that.


My goal from APRS was just to advance it by 1 year .. More 6 and 8 points running around and less spikes and forkys .. and once they get older and smarter some will make it to 3.5 and 4.5 like this one!
Sorry to disappoint you


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

It's funny how once APRs went into place in 2013, we saw a lot more 2 year olds in 2014. And guess what, we also saw a noticeable increased number of 3 year olds in 2015! 

But how can that happen when all the "experts" say that they will just all be killed as 2 year olds under APRs? Something doesn't add up!


----------



## hitechman

Uncle Boopoo said:


> It's funny how once APRs went into place in 2013, we saw a lot more 2 year olds in 2014. And guess what, we also saw a noticeable increased number of 3 year olds in 2015!
> 
> But how can that happen when all the "experts" say that they will just all be killed as 2 year olds under APRs? Something doesn't add up!


WE DID, huh? Not on my Mason County property in the last 3 years--probably due to 2 severe winters, but in any case, do not speak for me by using "we".........and I don't think it's "funny".

Steve


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

hitechman said:


> WE DID, huh? Not on my Mason County property in the last 3 years--probably due to 2 severe winters, but in any case, do not speak for me by using "we".........and I don't think it's "funny".
> 
> Steve


That's funny because Mason county is right across the street from me! My aunt and uncle have 40 acres on your side of the fence too! They had shots at 3 bucks this year that were all 3.5+ years old. The public land I've been scouting has been showing signs of larger bucks too! Maybe you should get out and explore a bit.


----------



## hypox

People still have to have reasonable hunting skills and know what they are doing.

You'd be surprised at what may be going on 150 yards over.


----------



## poz

mustang72 said:


> My goal from APRS was just to advance it by 1 year .. More 6 and 8 points running around and less spikes and forkys .. and once they get older and smarter some will make it to 3.5 and 4.5 like this one!
> Sorry to disappoint you
> View attachment 197539


what does it matter what your personal goal is. it didn't matter what the personal goal was for the guy who just wanted to shoot a legal deer. There are guys on here that have the same feelings about a guy that shoots a 2.5 year old as some guys on here have about someone who shoots a spike. That's a nice deer. But there some guys that would have passed it if they knew that was a 3.5 year old. should they get mad at you for shooting it. Should you be made to feel that you did something wrong?


----------



## Rut-N-Strut

mustang72 said:


> My goal from APRS was just to advance it by 1 year .. More 6 and 8 points running around and less spikes and forkys .. and once they get older and smarter some will make it to 3.5 and 4.5 like this one!
> Sorry to disappoint you
> View attachment 197539



Did I read that right?

Your goal "WAS" just to advance it by 1 year"....... But........ Your real goal is about more 3.5 and 4.5 year old's?

If I read that right, I commend you for being one of the first MAPR proponents to readily admit that it is not really about advancing age structure by 1 year............ But it is more about the trophy's.

Thank You.


----------



## mustang72

Rut-N-Strut said:


> Did I read that right?
> 
> Your goal "WAS" just to advance it by 1 year"....... But........ Your real goal is about more 3.5 and 4.5 year old's?
> 
> If I read that right, I commend you for being one of the first MAPR proponents to readily admit that it is not really about advancing age structure by 1 year............ But it is more about the trophy's.
> 
> Thank You.


Wow you are something else .. I never said my REAL goal was 3.5 -4.5?.. Lol.. 

I'm going to go spend time with my family because discussing a topic with you is crazy! Good luck the rest of the season! 

I'm out of here!


----------



## plugger

Uncle Boopoo said:


> That's funny because Mason county is right across the street from me! My aunt and uncle have 40 acres on your side of the fence too! They had shots at 3 bucks this year that were all 3.5+ years old. The public land I've been scouting has been showing signs of larger bucks too! Maybe you should get out and explore a bit.


 We killed two out of the three on my side of the fence , and another neighbor wounded the biggest. One we got was ok eating and the other is tough as leather.


----------



## hitechman

Uncle Boopoo said:


> That's funny because Mason county is right across the street from me! My aunt and uncle have 40 acres on your side of the fence too! They had shots at 3 bucks this year that were all 3.5+ years old. The public land I've been scouting has been showing signs of larger bucks too! Maybe you should get out and explore a bit.


And the Lake County line is my 120 acres of property's eastern border. 56 winter kills 3 winters ago ago--11 two years ago--none that we saw last winter. 2 and 3 years ago the deer started eating red pine needles as their only accessible source of food--tons of acorns on the ground 100 yards west in the hills, but they couldn't get to them. 3 years ago 3 of us killed two 8 points (120 class) and a 10 point (140 class), and let 4-5 spikes and forks go (that was the last year they were legal), which has been a typical season for the property. Two years ago (after a winter of 39" inches of snow on the ground at one time), 5 of us saw a total of 3 deer in 10 days of hunting the property......one was a forkie and the other 2 were mature does--no fawns. Last year 4 of us saw 2 deer--both does--in 5 days of hunting the property. I didn't hunt the property this year, but my grandson and 2 others did. One 6-point and 8 or so does on camera since Sept 15. Between the 3 of them they have seen 4 does (and no fawns), and no bucks.

I'm not foolish enough to believe this is true throughout Mason County, but it is true in about a 10 mile diameter circle with my property at the center--from Wahalla to the north and east and 4-5 miles SW of Irons. We've gone from 20 cars parked along the road bordering federal land to less that 2 at any one time. Hunter numbers and shots are way down in the area, because there are no deer. Go 10 miles west towards Fountain, and there are deer all over the place.

APRs will work--I am not denying that, but they won't work when winter kills off 2-3 age classes of deer every few years.

Steve


----------



## johnhunter247

Hopefully the 13 in northwest13 grows sooner than later! Hopefully because the way things are progressing they actually change the apr to 4 on a side. Michigan has to take baby steps!


----------



## bucko12pt

hitechman said:


> And the Lake County line is my 120 acres of property's eastern border. 56 winter kills 3 winters ago ago--11 two years ago--none that we saw last winter. 2 and 3 years ago the deer started eating red pine needles as their only accessible source of food--tons of acorns on the ground 100 yards west in the hills, but they couldn't get to them. 3 years ago 3 of us killed two 8 points (120 class) and a 10 point (140 class), and let 4-5 spikes and forks go (that was the last year they were legal), which has been a typical season for the property. Two years ago (after a winter of 39" inches of snow on the ground at one time), 5 of us saw a total of 3 deer in 10 days of hunting the property......one was a forkie and the other 2 were mature does--no fawns. Last year 4 of us saw 2 deer--both does--in 5 days of hunting the property. I didn't hunt the property this year, but my grandson and 2 others did. One 6-point and 8 or so does on camera since Sept 15. Between the 3 of them they have seen 4 does (and no fawns), and no bucks.
> 
> I'm not foolish enough to believe this is true throughout Mason County, but it is true in about a 10 mile diameter circle with my property at the center--from Wahalla to the north and east and 4-5 miles SW of Irons. We've gone from 20 cars parked along the road bordering federal land to less that 2 at any one time. Hunter numbers and shots are way down in the area, because there are no deer. Go 10 miles west towards Fountain, and there are deer all over the place.
> 
> APRs will work--I am not denying that, but they won't work when winter kills off 2-3 age classes of deer every few years.
> 
> Steve


Whitetail bucks are tougher than you think they are. Our APR has been in place for 15 years and we've had several winter kills (266" of snow and brutal cold two years ago) and we have still had good hunting in succeeding years. Yearlings are the first to succumb, but there has always been an acceptable number of bucks to hunt.


----------



## 357Maximum

bucko12pt said:


> Whitetail bucks are tougher than you think they are. Our APR has been in place for 15 years and we've had several winter kills (266" of snow and brutal cold two years ago) and we have still had good hunting in succeeding years. Yearlings are the first to succumb, but there has always been an acceptable number of bucks to hunt.


How much public land is in Leelanau County? It does not seem like much on the maps I have seen. Is that true?


----------



## bucko12pt

johnhunter247 said:


> Hopefully the 13 in northwest13 grows sooner than later! Hopefully because the way things are progressing they actually change the apr to 4 on a side. Michigan has to take baby steps!


Hopefully that never happens, I doubt there would be support for an increase, even among the group that pushed for implementation of the regulation.


----------



## fishx65

Even with all the crying around here I'm guessing that APRs in the NW12 will be permanent after the next survey in a few years. I have definitely enjoyed hunting under APRs but I think I would take less hunters in the woods over lots of 2 1/2+ year old bucks running around. Selfish I know but I've really enjoyed the state land solitude over the last 10 or so seasons.


----------



## Bigs43

poz said:


> Is your goal to advance the age structure by just one year, because that is all you are doing if you shoot most of the bucks you saved from the first year, the second year. or do you really want to advance the age structure. It's funny how someone posts a spike from a huge piece of property that hunting is not allowed and tries to sell it off as real world potential. The real change in Michigan will come when you don't need a mandatory law to protect most 1.5 year old. And when most hunters start voluntarily passing 2.5 year old. Until then, the actions of most hunters shooting 2.5 yr old deer is just as bad as shooting 1.5 yr old. when it comes to really making a change in the age structure... But you know that.


Most hunters in Michigan are lucky to see a 2.5 yr buck, now we should all voluntarily pass? Thats hilarious.... most hunters in Michigan would hang a 2.5 yr old on the wall. If you want more passes on 2.5 yr olds, you protect the 1.5 yd olds, people will see more 2.5 yr olds, over time many may start to pass and the bar would raise for many and more hunters will start to pass on 2.5 yrs olds as well.


----------



## bjacobs

Bigs43 said:


> Most hunters in Michigan are lucky to see a 2.5 yr buck, now we should all voluntarily pass? Thats hilarious.... most hunters in Michigan would hang a 2.5 yr old on the wall. If you want more passes on 2.5 yr olds, you protect the 1.5 yd olds, people will see more 2.5 yr olds, over time many may start to pass and the bar would raise for many and more hunters will start to pass on 2.5 yrs olds as well.


So where does it end?


----------



## hitechman

Bigs43 said:


> Most hunters in Michigan are lucky to see a 2.5 yr buck, now we should all voluntarily pass? Thats hilarious.... most hunters in Michigan would hang a 2.5 yr old on the wall. If you want more passes on 2.5 yr olds, you protect the 1.5 yd olds, people will see more 2.5 yr olds, over time many may start to pass and the bar would raise for many and more hunters will start to pass on 2.5 yrs olds as well.


My 2.5 year olds (in fact all of the deer I shot), hung in the garage until I butchered them myself, and then they resided in the freezer until eaten.

*EVERY* rack I ever got was immediately sold on eBay (made enough over the years to buy a few firearms with the money), so others could enjoy the false bragging rights. Deer antlers just aren't that important to me.

Steve


----------



## bucko12pt

357Maximum said:


> How much public land is in Leelanau County? It does not seem like much on the maps I have seen. Is that true?


I think it's a little over 20%, more than some, less than other counties.


----------



## 357Maximum

bucko12pt said:


> I think it's a little over 20%, more than some, less than other counties.


Thank you, Much appreciated. I only go up there to fish and never gave it much thought and could not find the info online other than a few maps that seemed to disagree with each other.


----------



## Jimbos

bheary said:


> Tip of the Mitt QDMA on facebook is unreal. Emmet county has some giant bucks


Great pockets of habitat still exist up there.


----------



## MossyHorns

hitechman said:


> And the Lake County line is my 120 acres of property's eastern border. 56 winter kills 3 winters ago ago--11 two years ago--none that we saw last winter. 2 and 3 years ago the deer started eating red pine needles as their only accessible source of food--tons of acorns on the ground 100 yards west in the hills, but they couldn't get to them. 3 years ago 3 of us killed two 8 points (120 class) and a 10 point (140 class), and let 4-5 spikes and forks go (that was the last year they were legal), which has been a typical season for the property. Two years ago (after a winter of 39" inches of snow on the ground at one time), 5 of us saw a total of 3 deer in 10 days of hunting the property......one was a forkie and the other 2 were mature does--no fawns. Last year 4 of us saw 2 deer--both does--in 5 days of hunting the property. I didn't hunt the property this year, but my grandson and 2 others did. One 6-point and 8 or so does on camera since Sept 15. Between the 3 of them they have seen 4 does (and no fawns), and no bucks.
> 
> I'm not foolish enough to believe this is true throughout Mason County, but it is true in about a 10 mile diameter circle with my property at the center--from Wahalla to the north and east and 4-5 miles SW of Irons. We've gone from 20 cars parked along the road bordering federal land to less that 2 at any one time. Hunter numbers and shots are way down in the area, because there are no deer. Go 10 miles west towards Fountain, and there are deer all over the place.
> 
> APRs will work--I am not denying that, but they won't work when winter kills off 2-3 age classes of deer every few years.
> 
> Steve


I hunt in the area you are describing. I saw deer every time I went out during the 2 days I was able to rifle hunt up there (Nov 15 & 16). I shot a nice 8 pointer on the morning of the 16th. Five of us hunt in the same general area. My son and I saw deer everyday, while 1 of my uncles never saw a deer after 4 days of hunting, which proves you can't base the size of the deer herd on one guys opinion.


----------



## Bigs43

hitechman said:


> My 2.5 year olds (in fact all of the deer I shot), hung in the garage until I butchered them myself, and then they resided in the freezer until eaten.
> 
> *EVERY* rack I ever got was immediately sold on eBay (made enough over the years to buy a few firearms with the money), so others could enjoy the false bragging rights. Deer antlers just aren't that important to me.
> 
> Steve


My point was 2.5 year old bucks are trophies to most Michigan hunters.


----------



## hitechman

Bigs43 said:


> My point was 2.5 year old bucks are trophies to most Michigan hunters.


My point was that any deer I have shot was a trophy to me.......the size of the antlers made no difference. Trophy bucks of 2.5 years old, are that to most hunters ONLY because they get some headgear to hang on the wall. I am not opposed to that, but it's not my way.

Steve


----------



## hitechman

MossyHorns said:


> I hunt in the area you are describing. I saw deer every time I went out during the 2 days I was able to rifle hunt up there (Nov 15 & 16). I shot a nice 8 pointer on the morning of the 16th. Five of us hunt in the same general area. My son and I saw deer everyday, while 1 of my uncles never saw a deer after 4 days of hunting, which proves you can't base the size of the deer herd on one guys opinion.


The 10 year period prior to 3 years ago, our group of 3-5 always got at least one 8 point or larger on my 120 acres. Very few sits during that period when we saw less than 5 deer each.....4 years ago, I personally saw 47 (I keep records) deer in 4 days of hunting. That's 45 more than I've seen in the last 3 years combined.

I am speaking of the deer population in my property's immediate vicinity only, and not that of all of Mason County. I've seen a "ton" of deer just 8 miles to the west of my place.

Habitat on my property is great, and has been managed to keep and attract deer. I'm not antiAPR. Winter kill over 2 severe winters took it's toll, and no (or very few) young age class deer survived to advance to an older age class. My place is in the swamp................10 to 15 degrees colder than surrounding areas in the winter, and 20-30% more snowfall-----a very localized phenomenon.

Steve


----------



## JVoutdoors

From the ground in NW13, Antrim, huge private sections of land that have been managed with APR for over 10 years, we luckily hunt a 40 in between and another next to. Notta really for all the camps. Couple young sml 8s. And the rut was in full force for the opener. We have also practiced voluntary APR for years with our neighbors but was nice to be able to let the kids or someone who only gets a day or 2 to hunt shoot a fork if able. These APR guys crack me up. Really get into it and sensitive if you don't drink the kool aid. You are not a real hunter if.... is all I hear them really saying. Nice crossbow in the one pic. They ought to ban those things and make everyone go back to recurves. That would sort the men from the APR studs with all their cameras, 100 hunting days, crossbows, 360 ft per sec compounds. If you get to hunt a couple of days each year, gets old with everyone lecturing me and telling me what to shoot. I am going to start calling it SDH, socialized deer hunting.


----------



## MossyHorns

hitechman said:


> The 10 year period prior to 3 years ago, our group of 3-5 always got at least one 8 point or larger on my 120 acres. Very few sits during that period when we saw less than 5 deer each.....4 years ago, I personally saw 47 (I keep records) deer in 4 days of hunting. That's 45 more than I've seen in the last 3 years combined.
> 
> I am speaking of the deer population in my property's immediate vicinity only, and not that of all of Mason County. I've seen a "ton" of deer just 8 miles to the west of my place.
> 
> Habitat on my property is great, and has been managed to keep and attract deer. I'm not antiAPR. Winter kill over 2 severe winters took it's toll, and no (or very few) young age class deer survived to advance to an older age class. My place is in the swamp................10 to 15 degrees colder than surrounding areas in the winter, and 20-30% more snowfall-----a very localized phenomenon.
> 
> Steve


I have a cabin in Irons and I know how bad the winter was two years ago. We had deer eating out of the bird feeder, which is 5' from the cabin. They were using the snowmobile trails to get around in the deep snow. The snow that year was the deepest we had ever seen in 20 plus years of having the cabin. I had to shovel the snow off the cabin a few times that year. Best year for snowmobiling we ever had, but very tough on the deer and turkeys.


----------



## Waif

hitechman said:


> And the Lake County line is my 120 acres of property's eastern border. 56 winter kills 3 winters ago ago--11 two years ago--none that we saw last winter. 2 and 3 years ago the deer started eating red pine needles as their only accessible source of food--tons of acorns on the ground 100 yards west in the hills, but they couldn't get to them. 3 years ago 3 of us killed two 8 points (120 class) and a 10 point (140 class), and let 4-5 spikes and forks go (that was the last year they were legal), which has been a typical season for the property. Two years ago (after a winter of 39" inches of snow on the ground at one time), 5 of us saw a total of 3 deer in 10 days of hunting the property......one was a forkie and the other 2 were mature does--no fawns. Last year 4 of us saw 2 deer--both does--in 5 days of hunting the property. I didn't hunt the property this year, but my grandson and 2 others did. One 6-point and 8 or so does on camera since Sept 15. Between the 3 of them they have seen 4 does (and no fawns), and no bucks.
> 
> I'm not foolish enough to believe this is true throughout Mason County, but it is true in about a 10 mile diameter circle with my property at the center--from Wahalla to the north and east and 4-5 miles SW of Irons. We've gone from 20 cars parked along the road bordering federal land to less that 2 at any one time. Hunter numbers and shots are way down in the area, because there are no deer. Go 10 miles west towards Fountain, and there are deer all over the place.
> 
> APRs will work--I am not denying that, but they won't work when winter kills off 2-3 age classes of deer every few years.
> 
> Steve


Would be interesting to track fawn numbers and sex since the downturn in numbers.
IF..Verne is correct and a growing herd produces more does and an overpopulated one produces more bucks
that would mean your property seeing more doe fawns till numbers were high for the habitat.

Without consideration of fawn crop ,dependent on harvest choices the year before of does ,and the herds ratio due to size and habitat condition a jagged course of trophy ,if any,mature bucks likely.
More so when numbers of bucks killed are young (below four years old).
2 1/2 is a youngster.
Growing true trophies requires a much lower harvest of young ones under four with a figure above 20% being too high for harvests if truly managing for trophies. It depends on the ratio of bucks to does too though when setting harvest figures.

Current A.P.R.'s are a tease at trying to make Mi. an oasis for trophy bucks if 2 1/2 year olds are any measure of success. Where numbers are possible due to a large over populated herd.
I'm seeing a few does suggesting unscientifically there are going to be more in the fawn ratio.
Winter checks around here also nonscientific, show few deer. Suggesting a growing herd if possible.
More does.
So how many bucks to take out and at what age?
Greater A.P.R.'s are not what's needed in my immediate vicinity either.
Given a large herd and with consideration of buck to doe ratio and not killing off bucks under four years old ....while not desired in my back yard it may be possible elsewhere.
For how long and to what affect is being studied.
Meanwhile visions of big numbers of big bucks are over riding consideration of sensible studies of where to employ greater restrictions.
Any one saying do it state wide is ignorant.


----------



## hartman756

bheary said:


> Tip of the Mitt QDMA on facebook is unreal. Emmet county has some giant bucks


*Yes it does and did so well before MARs ever came along*. Also lots of public land that gets little hunting pressure. I never understood why more hunters do not hunt Emmet county. The regular places on public land always someone's camp set up on during the summer but those places seem to never get used come deer season. More bird hunters around than deer hunters I Thought maybe this year with the UP being so bad there would be some camps around but it didn't happen.


----------



## hitechman

Waif said:


> Would be interesting to track fawn numbers and sex since the downturn in numbers.
> IF..Verne is correct and a growing herd produces more does and an overpopulated one produces more bucks
> that would mean your property seeing more doe fawns till numbers were high for the habitat.


From past experiences/observations of "really bad winters" (*on my property only*):
1 bad winter - deer population mostly recovered in 2 years of "good winters"
2 bad winters in a row - deer population mostly recovered in 4 years of "good winters"
Don't have any records of 3 really bad winters in a row (started records in 1963).

The sad point, to me, is that I will not be able to experience the total effect of APRs (on my property) until the fall of 2017 at the earliest, barring an additional "bad winter". I'm not an antler man--I'd still sell 'em on eBay--but the 3-4 guys that hunt with me are.

Steve


----------



## Waif

hitechman said:


> From past experiences/observations of "really bad winters" (*on my property only*):
> 1 bad winter - deer population mostly recovered in 2 years of "good winters"
> 2 bad winters in a row - deer population mostly recovered in 4 years of "good winters"
> Don't have any records of 3 really bad winters in a row (started records in 1963).
> 
> The sad point, to me, is that I will not be able to experience the total effect of APRs (on my property) until the fall of 2017 at the earliest, barring an additional "bad winter".
> 
> Steve


Ya, dang heck waitin to see what winters are going to be like.


----------



## hitechman

Waif said:


> Ya, dang heck waitin to see what winters are going to be like.


El Nino baby, El Nino. I'm hoping we can get a string of mild winters to help return "things" to normal. Would be great for the whole state, and especially for the micro-climate area my property is in.

Steve


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

Our place is about 4 miles from Walhalla. I could shoot a doe almost every sit. Found some of the best buck sign I've ever seen up there this weekend on public land and it was more than 1 buck doing it! Also found a couple buck beds I plan to set up on next bow season.

I did find a dead 4pt in our swamp today though! Half covered by grass. I'm assuming the bobcat I've been seeing is the one who covered him but I'm having trouble figuring out which one of my neighbors shot him. Really irks me because I heard guys blazing away at deer in several directions on the 15th! I hate amateur day sometimes!


----------



## norton shores killer

Uncle Boopoo said:


> Our place is about 4 miles from Walhalla. I could shoot a doe almost every sit. Found some of the best buck sign I've ever seen up there this weekend on public land and it was more than 1 buck doing it! Also found a couple buck beds I plan to set up on next bow season.
> 
> I did find a dead 4pt in our swamp today though! Half covered by grass. I'm assuming the bobcat I've been seeing is the one who covered him but I'm having trouble figuring out which one of my neighbors shot him. Really irks me because I heard guys blazing away at deer in several directions on the 15th! I hate amateur day sometimes!


 we are just south of branch store and have been seeing a ton of buck sign. Way more than in the past.


----------



## Uncle Boopoo

norton shores killer said:


> we are just south of branch store and have been seeing a ton of buck sign. Way more than in the past.


They have really good pizza!


----------



## norton shores killer

Uncle Boopoo said:


> They have really good pizza!


 we had two large pizzas from there for dinner on friday night!


----------



## Sam22

Munsterlndr said:


> Which aging system is that? Hint, it's not the DNR looking at teeth at a check station, the accuracy of that method is kind of scary if you are looking for accuracy.


You can say that again. I have heard of a few yearlings being called much older. I went to the aging class they give when I was in college.


----------

