Price increase added to list of antlerless tag changes

[Hamilton Reef]

Price increase added to list of antlerless tag changes

http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/news.php?story_id=31969

7-7-2006 By BRIAN MULHERIN Daily News Staff Writer
bmulherin@ludingtondailynews.com 843-1122, ext. 348

BIG RAPIDS — In 2005, deer hunters in Michigan could purchase as many antlerless licenses as they could get their hands on, could use them on any private lands they had permission to hunt in a given county, and paid just $10 a license.

Thanks to a number of changes implemented over the last few months, hunters now have a purchase limit of three antlerless licenses statewide, of which only two may be for the northern Lower Peninsula or the Upper Peninsula.

Hunters must also provide license dealers with the phone number of a landowner with more than 40 acres in that Deer Management Unit when purchasing an antlerless tags. They are not, however, limited to hunting only that person’s land, according to DNR Law Enforcement Chief Allen Marble.

On Thursday, Department of Natural Resources Director Becky Humphries added one more change to the list — a price increase. Although the Legislature set the price of an antlerless permit at $15 in 1994, for many years the director has allowed for lower pricing to help the DNR lower deer populations. With most of the U.P. and northern Lower Peninsula at or below deer population goals, Humphries announced she will end the discount, making an antlerless tag cost just as much as a buck tag.

The change, which is solely the decision of Humphries, will not take effect until the August meeting of the NRC. Antlerless licenses will not be available until after the price increase.

The number of antlerless licenses being offered in Mason, Lake, Manistee and Oceana counties was not changed by the Natural Resources Commission. Mason County will again have 5,000 private land tags available, Manistee will have 1,500, Oceana will have 4,500 and Lake will have zero.

The Commission altered the DNR Wildlife division’s recommendations for Osceola and Ogemaw counties, lowering Osceola from 3,000 to 1,500 in the Committee on Wildlife and Fisheries Issues and lowering Ogemaw from 4,000 to 1,200 in the committee and from 1,200 to 1,000 in the NRC meeting of the whole. Commissioners Bob Garner and Mary Brown opposed the amendment lowering Ogemaw a second time, but it passed, 4-2. The package of all antlerless quotas passed 6-0.

One other possible change is on the horizon for antlerless licenses. Currently, hunters do not have to purchase a buck license to buy an antlerless license. Bob Fisher of Baldwin Bait and Tackle pointed out that many, many people purchase antlerless tags and no buck tag. The DNR estimate of hunters who make such purchases is 35,000-40,000 people. Commissioners told Fisher that requiring a buck tag is something they might want to look into.

In other business, the commission approved purchase of a 1.2-acre parcel in Cheboygan for use as a trailhead, but commissioners made it clear that the purchase price of $50,000 seemed high and they would rather lease it or come to some other arrangement that would allow the state to avoid paying taxes on the land.

Commissioners also approved supplemental deer feeding, elk season quotas and state park waterfowl regulations that were unchanged from 2005.

[hunting man]

I like the idea of buying a buck license and not allowing the doe permit to be a stand alone license. The neighbor came over last Nov 14th and made the comment he wouldnt buy a buck license till he had one down.:mad: With the 10% decline in buck tags. I have to think many of the states deer hunters are doing just this.

[farmlegend]

Price increase added to list of antlerless tag changes

http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/news.php?story_id=31969

7-7-2006 By BRIAN MULHERIN Daily News Staff Writer
bmulherin@ludingtondailynews.com 843-1122, ext. 348

BIG RAPIDS — One other possible change is on the horizon for antlerless licenses. Currently, hunters do not have to purchase a buck license to buy an antlerless license. Bob Fisher of Baldwin Bait and Tackle pointed out that many, many people purchase antlerless tags and no buck tag. The DNR estimate of hunters who make such purchases is 35,000-40,000 people. Commissioners told Fisher that requiring a buck tag is something they might want to look into.


Requiring a buck tag? Now, I understand that this little paragraph is not exactly "fleshed out", and I may have the point misinterpreted, but, I cannot imagine any circumstance where I might want, in any fashion, to require a Michigan deer hunter to purchase a buck tag.

I personally know avid deer hunters that do not purchase buck tags, and there's no reason to compel them to do so.

Every season, I have guests hunting my property that do not have buck tags.

By gosh, if I were one of the brave DNR field biologists who bravely endured the "Jerry Springer Show"-style public input meetings, explaining the need to reduce deer numbers, and have now been publicly undermined by the new 3-antlerless tag limit, combined with even the suggestion that we require that all deer hunters purchase buck tags, I'd do everything I could to find a new job pronto.

[Trophy Specialist]

"The change, which is solely the decision of Humphries, will not take effect until the August meeting of the NRC. Antlerless licenses will not be available until after the price increase."

Actually the antlerless application period is July 15 - Aug. 15. The next NRC meeting isn't until Aug. 10. I believe that the article has an error in it. I find it hard to believe that they will turn away people from buying antlerless licenses until after the 10th of Aug. for 25 days. Why didn't they act on this increase months ago? This one will cause all kinds of unnesessary confusion. I plan to buy my antlerless license on July 15, especially with the lower quotas.

[November Sunrise]

I like this direction. I believe that making any distinction in price between a tag for antlerless deer devalues in the mind of the hunter the worth of antlerless deer.

Two of our neighboring states, Ohio & Indiana, don't make any distinction in tag costs. Each deer tag costs over $20, and can be used on any legally harvested deer. They have a one buck limit for the season, and the maximum number of antlerless deer taken by an individual hunter is defined by hunting area.

This direction in MI to make all tags the same price will make the transition to a one buck limit in the future much easier to accomplish.

[Trophy Specialist]

"One other possible change is on the horizon for antlerless licenses. Currently, hunters do not have to purchase a buck license to buy an antlerless license. Bob Fisher of Baldwin Bait and Tackle pointed out that many, many people purchase antlerless tags and no buck tag. The DNR estimate of hunters who make such purchases is 35,000-40,000 people. Commissioners told Fisher that requiring a buck tag is something they might want to look into."
They don't have to look very far. It used to be the law that you had to buy a buck tag before you could buy a doe tag. I would fully support such a requirement.

[Trophy Specialist]

I like the idea of buying a buck license and not allowing the doe permit to be a stand alone license. The neighbor came over last Nov 14th and made the comment he wouldnt buy a buck license till he had one down.:mad: With the 10% decline in buck tags. I have to think many of the states deer hunters are doing just this.
I know of a bunch of people that practice that buying strategy. I would bet that buck tag sales will increase 10-20 percent if that law is passed. The main advantages to this type of requirement FL would be twofold: it would reduce poaching and would increase revenue.

[November Sunrise]

Requiring a buck tag? Now, I understand that this little paragraph is not exactly "fleshed out", and I may have the point misinterpreted, but, I cannot imagine any circumstance where I might want, in any fashion, to require a deer hunter to purchase a buck tag.

I personally know avid deer hunters that do not purchase buck tags, and there's no reason to compel them to do so.

The writer missed the point of Bob's comments. Over the recent years when antlerless tags were a lesser amount than antlered tags, it provided an incentive for individuals to purchase just an antlerless tag and then wait to purchase their antlered tag until they'd taken a buck.

Creating price equivalency in tags renders this a moot point for the NRC to consider. Of course, that may not be a deterrent to them:).

[November Sunrise]

"The change, which is solely the decision of Humphries, will not take effect until the August meeting of the NRC. Antlerless licenses will not be available until after the price increase."

Actually the antlerless application period is July 15 - Aug. 15. The next NRC meeting isn't until Aug. 10. I believe that the article has an error in it. I find it hard to believe that they will turn away people from buying antlerless licenses until after the 10th of Aug. for 25 days. Why didn't they act on this increase months ago? This one will cause all kinds of unnesessary confusion. I plan to buy my antlerless license on July 15, especially with the lower quotas.

In areas where an application is required the results won't be posted until September 11th.

Private land OTC antlerless tag sales won't begin until August 16th this year.

[farmlegend]

I have no problem with price-equivalency, but have a big problem with requiring deer hunters to purchase buck tags.

[PWood]

The number of antlerless licenses being offered in Mason, Lake, Manistee and Oceana counties was not changed by the Natural Resources Commission. Mason County will again have 5,000 private land tags available, Manistee will have 1,500, Oceana will have 4,500 and Lake will have zero.

This info is incorrect. I don't know about the other DMUs, but Manistee had 3,000 Private land antlerless permits last year and sold out in three days. This year's permits for Manistee have been cut to 1,500. Personally, from the number of deer I saw there last season, the number of permits should have been cut to 0. The DNR has even stated that they overshot their population goal in that county by about 2,500.

[Trophy Specialist]

In areas where an application is required the results won't be posted until September 11th.

Private land OTC antlerless tag sales won't begin until August 16th this year.
I got the info about July 15 through August 15 in the current issue of Woods N' Water News. They have already sold public and private land anlerless permits to youths this year at $10 a pop though.

[GVDocHoliday]

This info is incorrect. I don't know about the other DMUs, but Manistee had 3,000 Private land antlerless permits last year and sold out in three days. This year's permits for Manistee have been cut to 1,500. Personally, from the number of deer I saw there last season, the number of permits should have been cut to 0. The DNR has even stated that they overshot their population goal in that county by about 2,500.

From the number of deer I saw last summer, while hunting, and so far this summer, I say that they should have increased the quota to at least 5,000. Manistee Co. has a buttload of deer.

[giver108]

From the number of deer I saw last summer, while hunting, and so far this summer, I say that they should have increased the quota to at least 5,000. Manistee Co. has a buttload of deer.


In all due respect, Doc you are the first person I have heard say that in years who hunts up there. I'm not doubting there are pockets of good deer numbers but, I would bet you ain't hunting anywhere near public land. I would like to see no permits offered for that county since a good percentage of the anterless deer shot are on public land, taken back to someone's 10 acre camp and tagged with a private land permit. I have dozens of friends and relatives who hunt there (I do too sometimes) and deer numbers are down according to every single one I have talked too. Send me a PM and let me know where you are hunting. :D :D :D

[Pinefarm]

I just have a few minutes now and will add more tomorrow, but the point I made, and I believe the NRC agreed, was that abuse and revenue loss due to a loophole was the flaw with the stand alone license. The point was, that of those some 40,000 that only showed to buy an antlerless tag and nothing else, the vast majority only bought the antlerless tag to get them in the woods for all seasons and would only buy the proper buck tag once a buck was dead on the ground. And since most are private land tags, this is easy to do. The MDNR law enforcement officer sitting directly behind me even made the comment of (paraphrasing) "and if they they only bought an antlerless tag, they'll certainly pass a buck (sarcasm added)". He even said after I was done "you know I was being sarcastic".
I also maintain that an equal amount of hunters also only bought an antlerless tag, but ended up killed a buck and later bought a buck tag, so those numbers of abuse could have reached 70,000 plus who were trying to scam the system.
For the few that may only want to hunt antlerless deer, the overwhemling loss of revenue due to the loophole is irresponsible.
Take 40,000 and times it by $15. That's your lowest annual revenue loss, per year. Taking 60,000 times $15 is more like it. IMHO
If Michigan had a system where you had to apply for a buck tag and not be allowed to buy one over the counter DURING the season, this would not be needed. But MDNR is losing a minimum of $600,000 a year over this and, if hunters ended up buying both an archery buck tag, a firearms buck tag and several antlerless tags due to the change, I bet we see license revenue increase by over $1,000,000 a year, in just todays license numbers.

[GVDocHoliday]

In all due respect, Doc you are the first person I have heard say that in years who hunts up there. I'm not doubting there are pockets of good deer numbers but, I would bet you ain't hunting anywhere near public land. I would like to see no permits offered for that county since a good percentage of the anterless deer shot are on public land, taken back to someone's 10 acre camp and tagged with a private land permit. I have dozens of friends and relatives who hunt there (I do too sometimes) and deer numbers are down according to every single one I have talked too. Send me a PM and let me know where you are hunting. :D :D :D


Surrounded by Federal Forest on three sides and the Manistee River to the south. Deer numbers have been on the upity up for the last few years. I also hunt in some of the worst habitat in the county...nothing but sandy outwash with redpine forests with a couple small pockets of oak/maple. No agriculture whatsoever for 15 miles, and that's to the north across Bear Creek and Coats HWY. All they have to eat around here seems to be any new growth and a 1.5acre foodplot that I put in every year...basically it's my backyard. I spend most of my time hunting the public land during archery season and see on average 10-15 deer a day, that's morning and evening sit. The last few years, the first few days of firearm have seen very poor weather, rainy and warm, which leads to no movement. I'd say 90% of the hunting in Manistee Co. is done in the first three days of the firearm season. So that's a large pool of hunters who'll claim that there are no deer. Yet every single day this summer and last summer I couldn't drive over 45mph from south Co Line to north County line and from Lake MI to M37. I'm alway scouting the public land along M55 and throughout the rest of the county. Nearly all of my Antlerless hunting is done during archery season with my combo nonrestricted tag on public land and with my antlerless Private OTC tag. One thing I've noticed...Most people around here who complain about deer numbers all hunt over bait. I haven't used an food attractent or hunted over one in 5 years. That's right, I do not hunt over my supplement plot or within a half mile of it...ever.

[farmlegend]

The point was, that of those some 40,000 that only showed to buy an antlerless tag and nothing else, the vast majority only bought the antlerless tag to get them in the woods for all seasons and would only buy the proper buck tag once a buck was dead on the ground.

I have a number of problems with this, but I'll stick to the first three that come to mind.

1. There is no evidence to suggest this is true. The "vast majority" of those 40,000 guys are poachers? Seems kind of unsupportable to me.
2. Forcing all Michigan deer hunters to purchase a buck permit, even if they have no desire for one, simply to "catch" guys that merely buy an antlerless tag to get themselves legally in the woods, is yet another attempt to regulate based upon what poachers may or may not do. A losing proposition.
3. Forcing hunters to buy a buck tag represents a real step backward in our efforts to get an adequate doe harvest, something we still need to work on in this state. It reinforces the mixed message to hunters in the same manner as the new 3-per-hunter antlerless tag limit; we say that we really want a herd of 1.3 million deer, but at the same time we regulate in a manner that discourages doe harvest. A step backwards.

Remember also, some legit hunters buy no buck tags, and at the same time, buy morethan one antlerless tag. What would such a policy say to these guys? Step up to the counter and pay an extra $15 tax? Just a way of penalizing the wrong guys.

What other states require deer hunters to purchase a buck tag? Ohio? Kentucky? Indiana? Illinois?

[farmlegend]

GVDoc, I have a friend (who I usually invite out to my place for a late antlerless season of M/L hunt) who owns 80a. nearby you, surrounded on three sides by national forest land. He tags one or two deer there every year, and, believe it or not, he kills most of them on public land. He confirms there are plenty of deer in the area. Oh yeah, did I forget to mention he never baits?;)

[fairfax1]

Not hijacking..... I'm still 'on topic' ..... really.

But, I like the part about raising prices ...a lot.

Hey Rebecca...yougogirlgivemhell!

I'm a hunter who thinks that a deer license will be one of the last-to-be-given-up luxuries, and therefore will always be fairly resistant to sticker-shock. Folks are gonna buy their license if it cost $35 to $50 a pop. Sure, we'll lose a few --- but the price increase will make up for the loss of those marginal customers.

If we only ran our deer huntin' like a business --and I was the CEO ---I'd sit my pricing & marketing guys down for a little Dutch-uncle chat and tell 'em to get the lead outta their pants and act like capitalist.....raise the damn price, pronto!

We've been too low for too long. When a product is cheap, guess what? Folks begin to think it isn't worth very much.

Raising the price for an antlerless permit by $5 lousy bucks is a pretty weak-kneed step but it is in the right direction. Hopefully, in 2007, Rebecca, the NRC, and perhaps the legislature where needed, will earn their Market Manager stripes and kick in some fair value pricing that will help them solve some of their funding issues ..........and quit their whining.

From my lips to God's ears.

[ART]

Hunters must also provide license dealers with the phone number of a landowner with more than 40 acres in that Deer Management Unit when purchasing an antlerless tags. They are not, however, limited to hunting only that person’s land, according to DNR Law Enforcement Chief Allen Marble.

That knocks out my spot in Washtenaw County. It is a ten acre parcel in Whitmore Lake that produces one or two deer every year for me. It is on the edge of a large swamp surrounded by 5 to 10 acre parcels.
Now a large part of the county will be effectively closed to antlerless because of it's makeup.

[November Sunrise]

That knocks out my spot in Washtenaw County. It is a ten acre parcel in Whitmore Lake that produces one or two deer every year for me. It is on the edge of a large swamp surrounded by 5 to 10 acre parcels.
Now a large part of the county will be effectively closed to antlerless because of it's makeup.

Unless there was a last minute change, the 40 acre requirement was not going to be in effect for the southern lower.

[Shop Rat]

is Michigan slowly changing the rules to copy states such as Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky. With higher prices, only 2 antlerless from this area and more in the south. All we need to do is go to 1 buck tag and ????:hide:

[November Sunrise]

is Michigan slowly changing the rules to copy states such as Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky. With higher prices, only 2 antlerless from this area and more in the south. All we need to do is go to 1 buck tag and ????:hide:

I hope you're right.

If the plans are to go to a one buck rule statewide in the future, making the price of all tags the same is a very logical interim step.

States such as Ohio & Indiana simply have deer tags - they don't make a distinction between antlered and antlerless deer tags. Each tag is good for one legally harvested deer. However, only one tag can be used for an antlered deer over the course of all seasons, and they also place limits on the total number number of tags that can be used in a given region.

[lang49]

1. The "vast majority" of those 40,000 guys are poachers? Seems kind of unsupportable to me.
2. Forcing all Michigan deer hunters to purchase a buck permit, even if they have no desire for one, simply to "catch" guys that merely buy an antlerless tag to get themselves legally in the woods, is yet another attempt to regulate based upon what poachers may or may not do. A losing proposition.
3. Forcing hunters to buy a buck tag represents a real step backward in our efforts to get an adequate doe harvest


I agree with all three of your points. Also- people don't seem to understand that the buck to doe ratio in the NLP still sucks! The 40,000 antlerless permits are the result of people who don't care if they see a buck. Outside the rut, the chances of seeing a nice buck (one that the AR guys consider acceptable) is Zero! Many hunters have accepted that fact and have chosen not to waste the money on a buck tag.

Oh, and there are plenty of does in Manistee County- I took a disease one last December with a bow (Milks Rd, West of Kaleva). One afternoon in late March, I counted 13 antlerless deer crossing Milks Rd- and some people still think there are fewer than 20 per square mile...

-Andrew

[PWood]

From the number of deer I saw last summer, while hunting, and so far this summer, I say that they should have increased the quota to at least 5,000. Manistee Co. has a buttload of deer.

Doc, Glad to hear your area of the county has an over-abundance of deer. Maybe you could invite my son and I over to help with this problem.
The land I hunt is in the northeast corner of the county about 1/4 mile from the Manistee/Wexford county line. Your right about the habitat, large stands of red pine, scotts and other conifers, no agriculture and not much available water. 7 years ago one of my neighbors did a 20-acre clearcut and young aspen are growing in nicely. 4 years ago another neighbor and myself joined together to clearcut another 5 acres that is now a very young hardwood forest of maples, aspen and beech. At the same time I planted my first 1/2 acre food plot (rye/clover mix). Last year we added two retention ponds since the only available water was in a small swamp more than a mile away in Wexford County.
Even with all of this, deer numbers continue to drop. 5 years ago it was not uncommon to see 5-10 deer at a time. 3 years ago we were lucky to see 10 deer all season. Last year, during the entire 3-month hunting season, we saw a total of 3 deer, one four point and 2 does. Even though we had antlerless permits, we let all of these deer walk.
I'm not just talking about seeing less deer but less deer signs. Less scrapes, less rubs, less droppings and less tracks. From my observations while scouting so far this year, things aren't any better. The DNR should eliminate the antlerless permits for Manistee County for at least 3 years.
But, we'll continue to try other things as well. We are now in the planning stages of adding another 1-1/2 acres of food plots. I'll let you know how our season pans out.

[Pinefarm]

You guys are missing the point. The vast majority of those 40,000 are NOT antlerless only/never kill a buck hunters. They are hunting bucks and hunting bucks first. They will only break down and spend the money after they've killed their buck or 2 bucks. In fact, they'll pass antlerless deer until late in the season because the cheaper antlerless tag is their meal ticket to get them in the woods. With it, they can scam the system and won't have to pay the extra $15 or $30 until or if antlers are down. The only thing they are not doing is paying for a buck license before they hit the woods, even though they are buck hunters, because they are only buying the very minimum amount to get them legally in the woods, that being the stand alone antlerless tag. This is akin to rampant and flagrant welfare fraud that has cost our cash strapped MDNR millions of dollars over the past few years.
The only thing this requires is that hunters follow the spirit of the law and buy their tag BEFORE they hit the woods, not after.
Again, if Michigan had an application system for bucks and did not allow any hunter, anywhere, to buy a buck tag anytime, this would not be a problem.

Let's put it this way, of all the topics I could have mentioned at the NRC meeting, here's the points that I thought were the most important at this time.

1. First I brought up that now MDNR has gone back to a 40 acre minimum in the NLP with some form of proof needed to buy an antlerless tag and a limit of 2, I said that I do not believe that the southern tier of the NLP (counties like Newaygo and Mecosta) needs any reduction in antlerless quota's. In fact, there could be an increase in the quota, with the improved system. Had the old system stayed in place, with the abuse of hunters with no land buying them and using them on public land and very small land owners in rural poverty stricten area's shooting a disproportional amount of deer and essentially undoing any measured management of surrounding landowners, I said that that would have warranted a possible decrease in antlerless quota's in the NLP.
The theme of this point was PRO RESPONSIBLE ANTLERLESS KILL.

2. My second point was that it's my opinion that Michigan should go to one "any buck tag" for archery season and one "any buck" tag for firearms season. I stated many reasons why here...
http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143229
The point here, again, is if you want hunters to pass more yearling bucks and be more apt to kill antlerless deer, then you cannot allow hunters to kill two bucks in any given season, especially firearms season, when most deer and 63% of bucks are killed.
The theme of this point was PRO RESPONSIBLE ANTLERLESS KILL.

And for the 3rd point, I could have chosen anyone of these topics that I believe are important...

1. Moving the firearms opener later in the rut.
2. Early antlerless firearms seasons in September.
3. Opening archery season on Sept. 1 and making Sept. antlerless only.
4. Run archery season until Jan. 31.
5. Creating a separate youth tag, so a youths could still archery hunt and hunt firearms season, even if they killed a buck during the youth hunt. The overall good outweighs the few extra bucks that would be killed. Cars kill way more bucks than would be taken by this setup.
6. Buckshot anyone? :lol: 'Nuff said. :lol:
7. Crossbows legal for anyone over 65. (Sorry Ibow, don't hate me for it. :) , but I feel this is the right thing to do)
8. Ban baiting. "Nuff said.
9. Move shotgun line north to M-55.
10. Actively promote private land owners to improve habitat and pass yearling bucks to take a doe and put it right in the Hunting Guide.

But I didn't. I didn't because a pressing issue at this time of a budget crisis, involving solid fraud by 10,000's of license buyers and heavy revenue loss to MDNR and new license package coming this Winter is the "stand alone" antlerless tag. Having a majorly flawed system for the rare instance that a hunter only bought antlerless tags because that person was only going to shoot an antlerless deer and never shoot any buck that came by, let alone a mature buck, is diminishing returns.
And the argument that if an antlerless tag is $15, then it should be "stand alone" doesn't work either. All you get then is hunters paying $15 instead of $30 or $45, until the point that they kill a buck. IMHO, 98% of hunters are hunting for a buck of some sort even if they are QDM'ers who pass most bucks and even for years at a time, they should pay the admission fee, not a commission fee only if the deal is sealed.
After 13 years behind the counter selling licenses, and seeing first hand the stunning number of people that openly say that they'll "wait to buy their buck tag after they 'got one'" and "how stupid is the DNR for letting hunters do this", this may be MDNR's most pressing "in house" problem IMHO.
I've emailed this concern to the NRC and MDNR before, so when I mentioned it at the meeting, they seemed alerted to it and up on the facts. I assume they've already discussed it and were aware of the problem. The MDNR law enforcement officer sitting behind me seemed to know exactly what point I was making.
Don't forget, it isn't just 40,000 hunters who only bought just an antlerless tag. You have to account for all those that only bought an antlerless tag, planning to scam, only to then kill a buck and have to buy a buck tag, taking them out of the 40,000 antlerless only tag pool. That 40,000 is just hunters who never killed their buck, for whatever reason. Correction, maybe 39,500. I'm sure there was a small number that had zero intention of killing any buck, even if a monster 10 point laid down infront of them and went to sleep. But without first buying a buck tag, killing that buck without a buck tag is both illegal and unethical.
But to allow maybe 1 out of every 10 hunters to openly scam the system in a big way, so maybe 1 out of 100 can buy a stand alone tag makes no sense. If someone is a dedicated 100% buck passing QDM'er, they should have no reservations about having to buy a buck tag. The vast majority of those only buying the antlerless tag to "get legal" and then buying a buck tag only after one is dead are not QDM'ers or even deer managers, they're scammers scamming the system, pure and simple.
Anyhow, I gave MDNR and the NRC my thoughts and what they do with it is now up to them. I've made my case and feel beyond 100% comfortable with it as someone who wants good, responsible antlerless harvest and passing of yearling bucks in the majority of the state. I'm done with this topic. If anyone disagree's or feels otherwise, I suggest they go to an NRC meeting and make their case otherwise.
Good luck and good hunting to all!

[Chris@hydeboats.com]

That knocks out my spot in Washtenaw County. It is a ten acre parcel in Whitmore Lake that produces one or two deer every year for me. It is on the edge of a large swamp surrounded by 5 to 10 acre parcels.
Now a large part of the county will be effectively closed to antlerless because of it's makeup.


I thought that rule was a little strange myself. Luckily I have a private land spot that I hunt that can meet the requirments, but my personal property falls short.

[Liver and Onions]

You guys are missing the point. The vast majority of those 40,000 are NOT antlerless only/never kill a buck hunters. They are hunting bucks and hunting bucks first. They will only break down and spend the money after they've killed their buck or 2 bucks. In fact, they'll pass antlerless deer until late in the season because the cheaper antlerless tag is their meal ticket to get them in the woods. ...

I don't think many of us are missing that point. We know that this is true. Are there a few doe only hunters, probably, but I've never talked with one. Most would be a doe only hunter until a nice buck walks out and then they will go buy the correct license or use a friends license. This does not include hunters doing a doe hunt only on private land. They are guests & friends of the landowner and likely would not take a buck and spoil a friendship. We have hunters on our property that are doe hunting only, but they all buck hunt on other land.

L & O

[Sib]

Bob, it would be interesting to see the number of deer licenses sold between Nov. 15 and Nov. 30, I would suspect that many of these would be antlerless deer tag holders making their buck kill appear legal.

I could support a license moritorium on deer licenses (excluding antlerless) between midnight Nov. 15 and midnight Nov. 30. Then resume sales as normal. I suspect you're right in what you say, nothing like seeing blood under the fingernail hunters purchasing their deer license at the local gas station, as I'm sure you and I are not the only one seeing this.

[lang49]

The vast majority of those 40,000 are NOT antlerless only/never kill a buck hunters. They are hunting bucks and hunting bucks first. They will only break down and spend the money after they've killed their buck or 2 bucks.

This sounds like an enforcement issue to me...Prosecute the hunters that violate the rules- don't change the rules to limit the abilities of law abiding people.

Likewise with the suggestion to move the rifle/shotgun line...the 450ft rule exists for a reason...violators are going to violate the rule regardless of what the rule says- Enforcement is the answer.

[Pinefarm]

I said I was done, but I have some numbers of interest.:)
And also, an enforcement issue for 60,000-70,000 hunters using a loophole with 2 CO's per county? Guffaw! :dizzy:
No, when bad policy with huge loopholes is the problem, that's what you fix. Not chasing close to 1000 hunters per county with 2 or 3 overworked CO's.

Here's what tags were sold on only the first 3 days AFTER firearms season opened in 2005

Nov. 15
Regular firearms tag 13,259
Combo tag 3293

Nov. 16
Regular firearms tag 6552
Combo 1295

Nov. 17
Regular firearms 7251
Combo 1137

I didn't ask for any dates after that, but I can if anyone needs more numbers. Granted, some of those were possibly people going out for the very first time. But my personal experience is that it's very few. Most are guys that just killed a buck and now need a tag. And I'll also grant that not all of them had an antlerless tag for cover, but I'll also grant that a large number of private land hunters did, especially in DMU's with high quota's.

[mikieday]

All i can say is this looks like a mess comming down..

I always buy a combo tag and then my antlerless tags...I hunt bucks till late in the season and then i start looking for a old doe...one deer for the freezer is good...so i have 2 buck tags with my combo and then i will buy 2 doe tags normally and i will not kill more then 2 deer in a year for my freezer...

so the state makes out on me...

Mikie

[farmlegend]

Just one more reason for private landowners to shun antlerless tags and purchase DMAP tags instead, and simply hand 'em out to their guests. At least until the revenue cops mandate that we buy a buck tag with each DMAP tag as well.:D

[NorthJeff]

"Let me say that I'm right there with Fairfax in that we are overdue for a substantial increase in our license fees, and I completely support such an increase. We've got the lowest-priced deer tags in the USA, and one could make the argument that we Michigan deer hunters get what we pay for."

:):) Usually the way it works!;)

[Liver and Onions]

, ............

Just one more reason for private landowners to shun antlerless tags and purchase DMAP tags instead, and simply hand 'em out to their guests. At least until the revenue cops mandate that we buy a buck tag with each DMAP tag as well.:D

Unless things have changed this year, DMAP's are not a hunting license. To legally use one the hunter must have a valid hunting license.

DMAP's are easy to get for any farmer who can show crop damage. That's why you haven't heard any or many complaints from the Farm Bureau or farmers about the 3 doe permit rule change....only from people who just don't know what they're talking about.

L & O

[mikieday]

i cant understand anyone wanting to up the price of anything ... i guess if you feel you'll get more out of it that is one thing but it has to be proved by me...in my opinon the herd can be manged better threw other means other then more money getting drug from my pockets...it seems everytime i turn around somebody is digging deeper into my pocket for more money they can misuse...

i guess if we have some of the highest taxes in the country we might as well pay the most for our fun things too...(in my opinion that is just wrong) i dont want to pay more i want to manage more...

jmo

Mikie

[Bmac]

I said I was done, but I have some numbers of interest.:)
And also, an enforcement issue for 60,000-70,000 hunters using a loophole with 2 CO's per county? Guffaw! :dizzy:
No, when bad policy with huge loopholes is the problem, that's what you fix. Not chasing close to 1000 hunters per county with 2 or 3 overworked CO's.

Here's what tags were sold on only the first 3 days AFTER firearms season opened in 2005

Nov. 15
Regular firearms tag 13,259
Combo tag 3293

Nov. 16
Regular firearms tag 6552
Combo 1295

Nov. 17
Regular firearms 7251
Combo 1137

I didn't ask for any dates after that, but I can if anyone needs more numbers. Granted, some of those were possibly people going out for the very first time. But my personal experience is that it's very few. Most are guys that just killed a buck and now need a tag. And I'll also grant that not all of them had an antlerless tag for cover, but I'll also grant that a large number of private land hunters did, especially in DMU's with high quota's.

Ever been to a meijer at 4-5 am on Nov. 15th? There are lots of people at my local place buying their license, shells, etc. They just wait till the last minute. There is no proof or reason to assume they are all poaching.

Most of my family and several co-workers buy antlerless only because they would rather see bucks and eat does. I can say though that if they are forced to buy a buck license several will go brown and down on the first thing with antlers the morning of Nov 15th instead of waiting for a nice fat doe.

If you want to prevent the post shooting purchases, stop selling them on Nov 14th. The biggest problem around me is the poaching from Nov. 10-14 right at daylight and dark.:rant:

[Trophy Specialist]

Of those 40,000 hunters that only purchase antlerless tags, but not buck tags, we simply have no accurate way of drawing any conclusions as to their intentions, be they legitimate (ie., they fully intended to hunt for antlerless deer), or "fraudulent" (ie., they're really buck hunters purchasing antlerless tags as a way of getting into the woods on the cheap). I think it's outrageous to suggest that 98 - 99% of them are fraudulent poachers..:D
I disagree. I could easily write and run a program (I have 15 years of programming experience) to cross check hunters that bought a stand along antlerless tag and then during the firearm hunting season, bought a buck tag. With that data, one could also accuratly extrapolate the total number of people bilking the system by applying the statewide firearm buck hunting sucess rate. Forinstance, if there were 10,000 buck tags bought during the hunting season by people that had only bought an antlerless tag before the season and the buck sucess rate was 10 percent, then there would be 100,000 people bilking the system. It could all be figured out. Do you think the DNR would let me have a crack at their system to find out?:D

[farmlegend]

DMAP's are easy to get for any farmer who can show crop damage. That's why you haven't heard any or many complaints from the Farm Bureau or farmers about the 3 doe permit rule change....only from people who just don't know what they're talking about.

As to how "easy" DMAP's are to obtain, that was pretty well-covered in another thread, and I believe you know this. Apart from the inconvenience of the application process, pointed out by folks that indeed knew what they were talking about, Ed Spin also rightfully added that local field biologists have broad authority to act on their own in denying these permits.

And not everyone has yet to be heard from on the 3 antlerless permit (not doe permit, as those who don't know what they're talking about sometimes call 'em) limit. The announcement of this was fairly recent, and trust me, some organizations will be weighing in with their dissent.

[lang49]

Forinstance, if there were 10,000 buck tags bought during the hunting season by people that had only bought an antlerless tag before the season and the buck sucess rate was 10 percent, then there would be 100,000 people bilking the system. It could all be figured out. Do you think the DNR would let me have a crack at their system to find out?:D

It is not "bilking" the system to buy only a doe tag, and shoot only a doe!

Also Bob, the numbers you posted regarding last year are in fact interesting. However, keep in mind that last year, opening day fell on a tuesday. It is very likely that the weekend warriors bought their tags on opening day, and never made it to the woods until Saturday morning- a whole 4 days later. I'd be curious to know how many licenses were sold on friday, November 18th of 2005- Likely alot, perhaps as many as on opening day?

[Pinefarm]

Lang, too late to call licensing, but our store license sales on Nov. 18 were less than 10% of license sales on the 14th.
The thing to keep in mind is, when people buy their antlerless tags in August, they often buy their other deer tags at the same time. But when it changed to stand alone, many guys now say that they'll get their other tags later. Not that that is cause enough to call them scammers, but I bet you'll see basic deer tag sales in August and Sept. increase noticably if the antlerless tags are no longer stand alone. We'd have to compare that next year to see the extent.

[Big_Jim]

The things I've read lately coming from hunters is going to be the death of hunting in this state. Requiring licenses? raising prices? shortening seasons? No wonder hunter numbers are going down, I'm glad you aren't in charge of the gas prices. The anti hunters love you guys, I'm sure they'll steal your ideas soon enough.

How about lowering the anterless permits prices back down, lengthening seasons and simplifying the rules.

Some of the things I've heard and read on this site and in Michigans outdoor publications are mind boggleing.

I understand how QDM works and the shortcomings of the MDNR. But you're all begging for an end to deer hunting in Michigan.

Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

[Liver and Onions]

........
Just one more reason for private landowners to shun antlerless tags and purchase DMAP tags instead, and simply hand 'em out to their guests. ......

Well, if you actually knew the rules, you would have known that your guest would need an actual hunting license........not just a DMA permit.
I'll agree that a lot of tag sharing still goes on, at least on private land in my hunting area. Not nearly as much as there was before the combo license though. Just another reason that the multiple buck tags probably aren't going anywhere soon.
I didn't know Ed S. had had any trouble with crop damage permits. Just a few months ago he stated that he and 3 other farmers had taken 120 does with these permits in '98. I guess that wasn't the year he had a problem. And you're right, the local field biologist is going to have broad authority in setting the number of these permits. Just who would you think it was going to be ? The local librarian ? The message that I hear from farmers who apply for crop damage permits is this: they offered me more than I wanted and we never filled all that we got. The bottom line is this, farmers who have crop damage will get an appropriate number of permits based upon what crop damage the field biologist sees. If that's not enough permits, they and all of their friends & family will just have to go to the store and buy 2 or 3 more apiece........depending on which zone they are hunting in. Problem solved.

L & O

[November Sunrise]

DMAP's are easy to get for any farmer who can show crop damage. That's why you haven't heard any or many complaints from the Farm Bureau or farmers about the 3 doe permit rule change....only from people who just don't know what they're talking about.

I'm one who's complaining.

I'm not fond of wasting my time or others. I know that it is a waste of time to contact my area biologist, ask multiple farmers whose properties I hunt to fill out the form, have the biologist drive by to look at the property, and then deal with the average license vendor who doesn't have familiarity with DMAP's, in comparison to the previous method of what amounted to unlimited over the counter permits in many S. MI counties.

In overpopulated DMU's the decision to limit the amount of individual over the counter tags is indefensible. To suggest that a much more bureaucratized process is equivalent to the system of the past several years is silly.

[farmlegend]

Just one more reason for private landowners to shun antlerless tags and purchase DMAP tags instead, and simply hand 'em out to their guests. At least until the revenue cops mandate that we buy a buck tag with each DMAP tag as well.:D

Since recitation of this quote seems to be a popular fetish, a clarification may be in order for the uninitiated.

A landowner, in possession of Deer Management Assistance Permits, may simply provide them, ie., hand them out, to any properly licensed guest hunting his land. A guest that purchases a valid private land antlerless permit is permitted to utilize DMAP's(not everyone knows this). Possession of a firearms license or a combo tag is not necessary for a hunter to utilize a DMAP.

From the MIDNR website, "You must have purchased a regular deer license (firearm, combination or antlerless) to hunt with or use a DMA Permit.

As originally written, my sentence was accurate and correct. Had it read "simply hand 'em out to their properly licensed guests, it would have been utterly unassailable. To suggest that my original sentence was evidence that I didn't know the rules is not only inaccurate but silly. And yeah, as a landowner who bought my farm with my own hard-earned dough, I have purchased and handed out DMAP's in previous years, and am well familiar with the process.

[Ferg]

When we start to nit-pick apart members posts and verbiage, it's time to rest - good thread guys.

ferg....