# Whats your take on the unlimited doe tags?



## HunterHads (Jun 28, 2005)

What do you think of the unlimited doe tags the DNR gives out? Also how many of you northern lower peninsula hunters plan on killing more than one doe this fall?


----------



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

I plan to take at least 2 does this fall/winter.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Unlimited? Gives out? There are quota's and tags cost $10. Here's how many permits are left in each DMU...
http://www.michigandnr.com/availablelicenses/default.asp?Type=P


----------



## HunterHads (Jun 28, 2005)

it might as well be unlimited with the number of tags they give out.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Well, my suggestion is, if one wants an antlerless permit for some of the DMU's around here, you'd better buy one soon before they're all sold out. Wexford and Lake county never had any to start with, Benzie is sold out, Manistee is sold out, Grand Traverse is sold out, and Mason will probably sell out over the weekend.


----------



## luv 2 bowhunt (Mar 27, 2005)

It creates a lot of fighting.
One guy feels it is his obligation to "thin" the deer herd and will get 15 to 20 antlerless tags.
The neighbor doesn't agree and may get one or two antlerless tags. (or none at all) 
Everyone has differing opinions on "herd management"
Some say 15 to 20 per square mile, yet others say they can sustain 40 to 50 per square mile, the problem arises when the two different approaches are next door neighbors.
I think that a limit of five tags per hunter could be a workable amount in the areas with lots of deer. When one guy gets over five tags per year I know that this creates a lot of tension between neighbors.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

My dream...

that as many guys worry about the number of buck tags we make available as worry about antlerless tags.


----------



## Tracker83 (Jun 21, 2005)

HunterHads said:


> What do you think of the unlimited doe tags the DNR gives out? Also how many of you northern lower peninsula hunters plan on killing more than one doe this fall?


Unlimited? Sorry, I just don't see it. The DMU I hunt has a moderately high population of deer, and last year the antlerless tags were sold out before bow season even started. I had several guests at my camp last year that could'nt get tags, and we certainly could have thinned another 3-5 does. This year there are 0 public land tags for our DMU, and they cut the private quota by 35%. Already, well over half of those tags are sold after only being available for a week. So I won't even answer the question because I don't accept your premise.

Tracker


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

I beleive there should be a limit at least by DMU per person. This allows more people to partake and takes some power away from the guy who wants to shoot em all and piss off the neighbor. I do beleive the doe tags are a beautiful thing but only when it is done to properly sustain the herd where it needs to be and I think as many people as possible should be able to take part in it. There is no reson one individual should have 15 to 20 tags for his 20 acres and also have others hunting it to that irresponsible IMO. I must admit though i loved the Newaygo County days of a few years ago when armed with 4 doe tags on the opener and there were does behind every tree it seemed it was fun for a few years :lol: Again I have no problem with people taking their share but it is not up to them to decide for the neighbor who may have more property. Limit it by DMU you can have it at 4 tags max per hunter and if you still want to shoot more doe off your chunk invite a friend that benefits more hunters and sustains the herd at a optimum level. The DMU limits could differ say between Newaygo cty and Jackson Cty as well but lets take some of the greed out of the sport and hey invite me down I'll help :lol: 

AW


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

[email protected] is correct, to state that there are unlimited antlerless permits available is inaccurate at best. If you're opposed to taking antlerless deer you can always purchase antlerless tags and not using them. The DNR would be happy to receive your money and you can play defense with your hunting style. There used to be a lil tavern on Drummond where you could deposit your antlerless permit if you didn't plan on using it. The bucket would get pretty full during the season.

I have one antlerless for the lower and will get one for the upper. I can't see myself taking more than two deer a season. I'd like one of those deer to be a buck. Having an antlerless for both areas I hunt just gives me more options. I'm not opposed to taking two does if I can't find an appropriate buck (within my volunteer AR), I know the areas I hunt can handle a healthy doe harvest. If I felt that area couldn't handle does being harvested, I wouldn't use them, but that's not the case.


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

HunterHads said:


> What do you think of the unlimited doe tags the DNR gives out?


The antlerless permits for DMU 057 will be sold out before firearm season begins. Hardly unlimited. Unfortunately the DNR doesn`t give them to me. I have to purchase them.



HunterHads said:


> Also how many of you northern lower peninsula hunters plan on killing more than one doe this fall?


The rule on my property is - if a doe stands still long enough to put the cross hairs on it, shoot it.
With the over browsed winter habitat in my area. I would consider only one doe to be a disaster.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

Bob do you have others hunting you rpeoperty or is it just you that hunts it? As I said above I do not think we want to go back to only one tag per person but I think it would benefit a lot of people to go out and have a limit of say 4 in your are and maybe 2 in my area etc per person based onthe needs of the antlerless harvest per DMU. I am not saying that you may not need to shoot a great deal of antlerless but i have a feeling that it is not difficult to find friends and famliy who are knowledgeable deer hunters who will help people out that need the help. I do not see the necessity for one person to hoard 20 tags like we have all heard of in the past from certain land owners.

AW


----------



## Chuck (Sep 24, 2000)

Some of the southern counties never sell out so it could seem like limitless doe tags. 

The thing I hate seeing is when you have so many doe tags for private land when most of or alot of the county is made up of public land. Like Allegan county, you have 3000 doe tags for public and not all will be sold and you have 13,000 (15,000 last year) for private. Any one want to guess where most of those private antlerless tags will be filled?

I have to agree that there should be a restriction on how many an individual hunter can buy.


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

Adam Waszak said:


> Bob do you have others hunting you rpeoperty or is it just you that hunts it?


My dad and brother also hunt the property. Remember I have only 42 acres. Any more than three hunters would undermine my low impact hunting



Adam Waszak said:


> I do not see the necessity for one person to hoard 20 tags like we have all heard of in the past from certain land owners.


Like we have all heard? While that may be the popular fantasy. It is not based in fact. Figures given to me by Rod Clute back in February. There were only *5* individuals who purchased 20 or more antlerless permits for 2004. Fact is 96% of individual Michigan hunters purchased 3 or less antlerless permits. 

DNR surveys also indicate that only 33% of antlerless permits are filled. That means that the vast majority of Michigan hunters are not shooting more than one antlerless deer.


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

Chuck said:


> Like Allegan county, you have 3000 doe tags for public and not all will be sold and you have 13,000 (15,000 last year) for private. Any one want to guess where most of those private antlerless tags will be filled?


What good will increasing the number of public antlerless permits do, if they're not selling out at the current level of public antlerless permits? I don't know where most of those private permits will be filled. Are you saying that most will be filled on public land?


----------



## HunterHads (Jun 28, 2005)

Ok I guess that unlimited was the wrong way to put it. All I am trying to get at is do you think the DNR is doing a good job of giving these tags out? In my opinion they are not. There are areas that need a lot of these tags because the deer numbers are so high, but I hunt in Otsego county and these tags have just killed the hunting. Last fall I hunted hard all season and I only saw 7 deer. 7 DEER in 2 1/5 months of hunting. 5 years ago I would see 7 deer a day. I think the DNR needs to do a better job of deciding witch counties need the doe tags and witch counties don't. There was no rut by me last fall because there were no doe to make one. It does not help either when there are people around you that will shoot ever deer that they see.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

Bob S said:


> My dad and brother also hunt the property. Remember I have only 42 acres. Any more than three hunters would undermine my low impact hunting
> 
> 
> Like we have all heard? While that may be the popular fantasy. It is not based in fact. Figures given to me by Rod Clute back in February. There were only *5* individuals who purchased 20 or more antlerless permits for 2004. Fact is 96% of individual Michigan hunters purchased 3 or less antlerless permits.
> ...



Bob, I am not trying to get into it with you and the 20 tags was a figure tossed up for sake of argument I beleive you ae stating correct information as I do not have any reason to doubt what you are saying at this point. But say you rarea was limited to 3 or four tags and with three hunters thats 9 to 12 does per year plus archery tags as well. 12 doe's off of 42 acres is a pretty big deal when you are looking at DPSM. You all get some great eating, plenty of shooting and you choose if you fill them all or not and have your own input on the management scheme you choose is best. That is my opinion and mine only. As I said Bob I do not know your situation and have never seen your property but you obviously feel there are too many antlerless deer around you. In my situation I could have 8 doe tags right now for northern newaygo cty and I feel that is wrong because there are just not the deer there this year to sustain people shooting like that.

AW


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

As long as there is no management consideration involved, and the owner is willing, I can see no reason for limiting the landowner to a finite number of tags other than jealousy of envy. Property rights mean something, and no landowner ought to be compelled to invite others onto his land in order to meet his management objectives.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

FL I see your point but it is the question of when is someone managing their land and when are they managing everyone else land in addition to their own? I see what you are saying and I am not saying you must invite others onto your property but lets face it we are all hunters here and we can find people to help us with doe duty if we need that. I just do not see it necessary for some individuals to have so many tags it affects others in the area negatively. Thats all

AW


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Adam Waszak said:


> it is the question of when is someone managing their land and when are they managing everyone else land in addition to their own?


Sincerely, Adam, the way I see it, the most prevalent type of harvest strategy which influences conditions on neighboring properties is the time-honored practice of whacking yearling bucks at every opportunity.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

FL, I agree with you on the yearling buck issue but it is not legal for a landowner himself to take more than 2 of them in a season while it is legal to shoot as many doe's as you have tags for there is the major difference in this. I think I agree with you a lot more than you think and I see the necessity to protect one sex of the deer herd but we also need to take the other sex in moderation. Without doe's or bucks we will be without future doe's and bucks that is all. I speak of this differently because of what I have seen in my area happen. I realize your area especially if it is in SLP is way different and the need to thin is warranted probably. It is difficult to express what we feel in our own area as we do not know specifics of each area the other person speaks of. I wish I could show people our situation and they would not view me as a doe "lover" because in reality I wish i could shoot as many as 5 or 6 a year because I love the hunting and the meat but in my instance it could be devastating to the area.

AW


----------



## MI newguy (Mar 21, 2005)

In emmet county where I own property and do alot of hunting, thier is alot of farm land and nobody hunts it. The other problem is some private sections are owned and hunted by 3 or 4 people. Were talking 200 - 500 acres. And no you can't get axcess, I tried. Thier are so many deer in some of these fields you can see as many as 60 on a regular basis. Last year my friends buddy shot this deer.

[Insert picture of Piabold Deer here]

Caused from interbreading, too many deer in one area. I have had people call with sightings, of three more two bucks and a doe. Piebald? Albino? Sounds kinda crazy.

My property is about 5 miles from this area, I see as many as 20 deer a day, last year only three bucks total (over 3") I shot two six points and one eight point over the last two years. I purchased 4 doe tags and let two friends purchase one each, for a total of 6 does to be harvested of the property.Corn on two sides of me and an apple orchard on the other, many deer passing thru. Out of the 100 acres around me maybe 3 hunters total. All private land with no access.........


----------



## Chuck (Sep 24, 2000)

"What good will increasing the number of public antlerless permits do, if they're not selling out at the current level of public antlerless permits? I don't know where most of those private permits will be filled. Are you saying that most will be filled on public land?"

Sib,

I wasnt clear I guess. I dont think there needs to be more for public land. Its just there are 55,000 acres of public land in Allegan county. They released 13,000 doe tags for the private. My concern is that since they have increased the doe tags to astrinomical amounts deer on public land have been dissapearing. My point is that I feel alot (not majority by any means) of those tags get used on public land. But with the level of poaching in this area Im not sure it even matters. Its just to easy for hunters who do not have access to private land to go and buy a private land doe tag and use it where ever they see fit. They have loosend up the restrictions to much. I think the DNR from recieveing so much preasure from insurence companies and farmers to make it an easily abused system. 

Ihope that makes it a little clearer.


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

It does, I wasn't trying to debate the issue, just wanted to understand it better.

Yeah, I suspected there was a fair amount of poaching in that area, as I have a few friends down that way. Personally, I like the DNR requiring tax ID numbers to obtain private land permits. I think it would be harder for the hunter without access to private land to obtain private land permits. People don't share those numbers with total strangers. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Sib said:


> People don't share those numbers with total strangers.


The thing is Sib, those numbers are not secret numbers. It takes little effort to find out someone's property tax number. That is one of the reasons it became useless to require property tax numbers.

The requirement of the property tax number did more to make violators out of honest people than it did anything else. Many property owners would provide a tax number that was wrong because they took down the wrong number or many different reasons. Without the correct number for the permit it would make it so that property owner or the hunter that did have permission to hunt there would be hunting illegally then because the permit would not be valid because of the wrong number.

When the requirement was a certain number of acres and a property tax number, I could look at the number and tell you the county, township, section, range and how many acres was involved in that particular tax number without knowing who the owner was or anything else. Also, the only way to match a tax number to a name was to go to the county that the information was not shareable between the county and the state (or hunting license terminals in this case) via computer checks.

If there was a good reason to require that number and a easy way to verify the number being used honesty then I'd be all for it but that option is not available so it makes a additional requirement of the hunter to be the same as bureaucratic red tape.


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

Interesting, I didn't know about the loopholes. If it was that easy to circumvent the system, then I agree it really didn't do anything but add more red tape. Thanks for giving us the inside insight.


----------



## Chuck (Sep 24, 2000)

I didnt realize the problems the tax id numbers created either. But in this day and age of computer technology its amazing its not made easier. Think of the wealth of information that could come from this. You would know how many doe taqgs were sold for each type and amount of acreage. You would know how much preasure each piece of property recieves and so on. I guess this would take micro managment to the nth degree which could couse more problems.

But I guess with the state in the trouble it is already with money it would be some time before Michigan could afford to do this.

Im sure no matter the system there will always be those that will find a away to abuse it.

As always boehr thanks for you insight. Your so good at clearing things up.


----------



## Rifleman99 (Sep 21, 2004)

I have property in the so called TB zone:lol: . The DNR has given out an unlimited # of tags in this area for many years. Since this ingenious desciscion, my neigboors and I have seen the #'s plumit. I'm presonally tired of hearing we have to get TB under controll when there has not been a tb deer taken by anyone we know in the greater alpena area, and the dnr's #'s are under 2% for the entire tb zone. So long story short, I beleive in certain areas it can be really bad for hunting and the deer #'s as for others it might be nessacary to thin down the population.


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

I'm not sure what that means, well I know what it means, but - there are 6000 tags that were made available in DMU001 of those 6000 ONLY 274 have been sold as of today.

But, (why is there always a but?) - eveyone needs to remember, the management goal of the DNR in the 'zone' is ERRADICATION - Not QDM or TDM or anything of the sort.

ERRADICATION say it with me E R R A D I C A T I O N -  


ferg....


----------



## ArrowFlinger (Sep 18, 2000)

farmlegend said:


> My dream...
> 
> that as many guys worry about the number of buck tags we make available as worry about antlerless tags.



I have all the intentions of taking 2 doe with my combo tags. Now if mister big and stupid gets in the way, it's a bonus.


----------



## vandermi (Jun 6, 2003)

farmlegend said:


> My dream...
> 
> that as many guys worry about the number of buck tags we make available as worry about antlerless tags.


Right on the money again Farmlegand.

We will shoot the ratio atleast. Right now with all the scouting it looks as if we need to shoot a minimum of 3 does for every buck we take just to maintain the current ratio. 4 doe for every buck if we want to start putting a dent in the ratio.

Last year I took 4 doe and two bucks. This year hoping to get 4 doe and 1 buck atleast. The trail cameras, shinning and scouting are showing a ton of 1.5 and 2.5 year old bucks and only a couple of 3 year old or better. I am sure we have older but just not seeing them yet.

We are holding out for 3.5 or older this year as much as possible. But as far as mature does, we need to thin them out.


----------



## Murphy (Aug 10, 2005)

Bob S said:


> The rule on my property is - if a doe stands still long enough to put the cross hairs on it, shoot it.
> With the over browsed winter habitat in my area. I would consider only one doe to be a disaster.


You know that is interesting that you say that...

When I started hunting as a newbie, my farmer friend in the U.P. told me the same thing... I made comment about DNR this and DNR that and quoted the text on my combo tags..

He just laughed really hard... 

Murphy


----------



## Rifleman99 (Sep 21, 2004)

Ferg said:


> But, (why is there always a but?) - eveyone needs to remember, the management goal of the DNR in the 'zone' is ERRADICATION - Not QDM or TDM or anything of the sort.
> 
> ERRADICATION say it with me E R R A D I C A T I O N -
> 
> ...


The DNR will never E R R A D I C A T E "TB", or at least admit to it for the short time. They are in a major budget deficit and money talks. Unfortunately we do not live in a world of honest people or politicians for that matter. I respect your views and opinions on various posts on here. You do your homework and that is evident. However, this topic is a lot more political than you could ever imagine.....And if money is what the DNR needs, they do there best to keep laws/regulations in place that will bring it in for them :tdo12:


----------



## fulldraw (Nov 20, 2002)

When comes to unlimited antlerless permits I think their should be limit on this because if we kill off the majority of does then their won't be enough to reproduce and less bucks. Every year you here huntes including myself that their are less deer then last year. This should make you think is unlimited antlerless permits good for the state. 

fulldraw


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

Rifleman99 said:


> The DNR will never E R R A D I C A T E "TB", or at least admit to it for the short time. :tdo12:


What you mean by they wont admit to it? This quote is directly from the DNR web site on TB erradication:

"Currently, the strategies for eradication of the disease have centered on reducing the deer population densities through hunting and reducing deer congregation by restricting or eliminating bait and feed. New strategies, though not intended to replace the existing strategies, would involve live-trapping and TB testing of wild deer and the removal of infected animals."

That sure sounds like they 'admit' that that is what they are doing or at least attempting to do. But even with that - there are NOT Unlimited permits available EVEN for the TB Zone - hell, in fact, there are thousands more available on private land than will EVER be issued in the 'zone' 

ferg....


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

fulldraw said:


> When comes to unlimited antlerless permits I think their should be limit on this because if we kill off the majority of does then their won't be enough to reproduce and less bucks. Every year you here huntes including myself that their are less deer then last year. This should make you think is unlimited antlerless permits good for the state.
> 
> fulldraw


See the link on the first page of this thread for current limits that have been set by the DNR.

ferg....


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

fulldraw said:


> When comes to unlimited antlerless permits I think their should be limit on this because if we kill off the majority of does then their won't be enough to reproduce and less bucks. Every year you here huntes including myself that their are less deer then last year. This should make you think is unlimited antlerless permits good for the state.


 
Once again........*There is no such thing as "unlimited" doe permits."*


----------



## Burksee (Jan 15, 2003)

Whit1 said:


> Once again........*There is no such thing as "unlimited" doe permits."*


Whit, I guess some people cant read..... Or they just believe what ever there told, anyhow for those of you who care to check out just how many antlerless permits there are for any particular DMU go the DNR website, they break it down between public and private land. For the "over the counter" DMU's it also tells you how many are still available!

* One more time for the record; *FOR THE 2005 DEER HUNTING SEASON THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "UNLIMITED" ANTLERLESS PERMITS! Got it? Good!  *


----------



## Rifleman99 (Sep 21, 2004)

Ferg said:


> What you mean by they wont admit to it? This quote is directly from the DNR web site on TB erradication:
> 
> My point exactly Ferq...There will always be a population of TB deer according to their #'s, no matter if the disease is present or not. Trust me, the TB outbreak is a money maker for the DNR, and they are in short supply of it...


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

Rifleman99 said:


> Ferg said:
> 
> 
> > What you mean by they wont admit to it? This quote is directly from the DNR web site on TB erradication:
> ...


----------

