Sylvan

Here in NY there are no antler restrictions and everyone gets 1 buck only tag. If you archery hunt you also get a tag that allows you to take either a buck or a doe. As population growth is controlled by the doe (not buck) total population is controlled here in NY by the number of doe permits (dmp's) that are issued by district. If the deer population is high the DEC will issue more dmp's which results in a higher doe take, if it is low they will reduce or even eliminate them thus more doe survive and population increases. Doesn't seem to be a problem here in NY controlling numbers without AR's. Mabe it is you who is mistaken. The number of dmp's were actually reduced for most districts in NY this last year in an effort to increase populations.

_Dan

Did you read my earlier post? Or just jump to this one? I never used NY as an example, or any other state for that matter. What I meant was that people confuse ARs with trophy management.

Like I said earlier, ARs are one way of managing a deer herd. They are by far not the only way and are not resonable in all areas.

Great, I am glad NY has it under control in your area. The same system has been in place here in WI and has failed miserably.

What's the solution in WI? A number of different things. I believe that is why we have deer management units here. What is good for one area is may not be good for another. Whether its ARs, earn a buck, doe seasons, extended seasons, the list can go on and on.

Now, did I make it clear? Or am Istillthe one who is mistaken? If you like I can try to explain it more, but it seems pretty clear to me.

Sylvan

I only read your last post which quite clearly linked AR with population control. I don't believe AR has anything ofsignificance to do with it. Population control must focus on the doe take to be successful. AR has a minor influence on the doe take at best. Again I didn't read your earlier posts butimoif you believe AR has anything more than a minor influence on total population then yes indeed you are mistaken. If you agree then I guess I have mis read you. Sorry...

Sylvan

THey are not confused. That is exactly what AR's are intended to do, i.e. increase the number of larger antlered buck in the woods. If it didn't do that, no one would be interested. "Let em go and let em grow", that's the slogan and we all know what it means.

_Dan

Sylvan, hereare twoquotes from my earlier post. Apparently, again, you didn't read it.

Trophy deer are a direct result of ARs, but are not the reason for it. Thats where the confusion is.

I believe the second one clearly states where I believe ARs would work in some areas. Like I said in my previous posts, some areas.

G-Dawg_02

Here in AR, we have antler restrictions that consist mainly of 3 pts on one side. We have had this rule in place now for about 5 years. The effects I am JUST NOW SEEING: I have seen more bucks, however, most of these are inferior bucks! Many small spikes, and many, MANY more 14 inch spikes and basket rack 4 pts which are 2.5 and 3.5 yr old deer. The problem is, we can't shoot these inferior deer, and the young bucks with good genetics are the ones being taken out of the herd. I did see a few more good bucks this year, but by and large, I se MANY MANY more inferior 2.5 and 3.5 yr old bucks which continue to breed the does with their poor genetics. I mean, I am seeing more bucks, but most are illegal to shoot under the 3 pt. rule.

west_hunter21

I've only been hunting for 7 or 8 years...and just the past two years I've picked up bowhunting. In that time, I've seen 1 antlered deer--a small 1 1/2 year old spike buck that I shot last year during rifle season...and believe me, I do hunt pretty hard throughout the year both rifle & bow season.

Long story short here though--I think there has to be SOMETHING done in Wisconsin..atleast in the unit I hunt (24 or 25 I believe). The buck:doe ratio is so out of whack, and it is definitely not getting better! In fact, just as an example, our neighbors across the road shot about 50-70 per year for the past 3 or 4 years. They have shot 4 or 5 nice sized bucks, but I'm guessing they've put down more button bucks than they have all other bucks of legal size (this is not an exageration!)

What I think needs to happen is to put some type of rule to get people to quit shooting the fawns all together...whether it been doing away with T-zone (which I don't hunt anyways), or making hunters use their buck tags on button bucks...I don't know. Unfortunately, Wisconsin DNR is too worried about controlling CWD than keeping the herd in healthy numbers

Sylvan

Dan,
I don't think we are communicating. All I am saying to you is that you indicated that you can control the herd population through AR. You said "ARs are one way of managing a deer herd." I agree that AR can have a small influence on the doe take but not a significant enough of an influence to actually control the population. That's all. No big deal. You either agree with me or you don't.

As far as... like I told you before, there is no confusion. I understand what you are saying. I just completely disagree with you. IMO trophy deer is precisely the reason for it. The slogan is "let em go and let em grow" not "let em go and let em get healthier" now is it?

_Dan

You're right, I said one way. Not the only way or always the correct way.

Do you actually think that a DNR has implimented ARs to produce trophy bucks? That's an easy answer, no. They are interested in controling the population of deer, not growing big bucks.

As far as QDM Association's moto, I never quoted it. I believe QDMA's goal is to produce trophy bucks. But they are also producing a quality herd. Does that sound confusing? Of course. But 2 different goals end up producing the same results.

I think we both agree that ARs are not a good idea for your area. But,in my area here in WI, I gurantee it would work.

Also, I should add that I don't think a 3pt on one side is a good rule. I believe it should be 4pt.

BOWFANATIC

It'sstill difficult to see from where I'm standing.If EAB isn't producingenough doe kills to please theDNR , how will antler restrictions?

You also make it sound like antler restrictions might also increase the doe harvest , as if it's intent is to grow big bucks and a bigger doe harvest might just be an added bonus.
The way I understand it's the other way around. It's (AR) intent is to get people to shoot more doe instead of shooting any buck.
Now , if people aren't shooting enough doe with EAB in place , how will AR change their minds and get them to shoot more doe?