One Buck Per Hunter, Per Season?

[Trophy Specialist]

There have been many suggestions by hunters to restrict hunters to just one buck per season in this forum. The vast majority of deer hunters have been buying the combo license tags, which has been a huge source of additional income for the DNR. In these days of budget shortcomings, if the combo license were to be eliminated, then the cost of a single buck tag would likely be doubled to make up for the loss of revenue. Besides, the percentage of hunters that successfully take two bucks, one of which must have 4-points on one side, is very low.

[mich buckmaster]

I would vote for a point restriction on only one buck a year, until we get our herd managed better. Then I would be for two bucks a year with second buck being an 8 point or bigger.

[MGV]

I have not shot a buck in a few years. I am thinking the one buck a year would be a great idea and giving the option to take a doe instead on the same tag. And that would be it for the year. No more no less. The points is a ok idea but i see some problem with interbreeding.

[islaysteelies]

I don't like the 4pts or better on one side rule...I was fortunate enough to shoot 2 bucks this year, but had to pass on a couple with my rifle that I could not count the points...I know they were big racks, but I could take the chance and one side not being 4 or more, so that sucked...

[Sarge]

I like the one buck per year per hunter.

My personal choice would be one DEER per year per hunter. Issue a quantity of licenses based on herd density in a given area. Each hunter can kill one critter, either sex, and he's done till next year.

I think there would be a lot more careful hunters and the rules would be simple. One rule, it has to be a mature deer. DNR could provide classes for a fee that help people who are inexperienced learn how to identify the mature animal. That fee could help defray some of the difference in license fees.

[Old Hunter]

Combo License with 2 kill tags, 1 buck and 1 Doe which can be used in either season, bow or gun.:) :)

[Oct.1]

Old Hunter,
I'm with you 100%

[Trophy Specialist]

It does indeed look like the majority of respondents to the survey favor eliminating the combo license even though the vast majority of hunters still buy combo licenses. I have a question for the people who voted for "one-buck per hunter, per year":

Did you buy a combo license last year and if yes, why, since you don't think a second buck should be killed?

In my opinion, the current two-buck limit regulations will not be changed by the DNR until the majority of deer hunters do not buy combo licenses.

[jimbos43]

I voted for one buck only, did not buy a combo license. I also believe that if you happen to shoot a button buck, your one buck tag should go one it.

[MGV]

Did not buy a combo license

[Whit1]

One buck....one doe.......per hunter. In the areas of too many does allow an extra doe to be taken. With all the talk of our buck/doe ratio being out of whack it always amazes me that some hunters still want multiple buck tags.

Hunters tend to be against over regulation in many facets of life; yet on this issue, some seem compelled to complicate things with a convoluted and twisting strand of management.

The old adage of KISS...Keep It Simple Stupid....can still be applied.

[PrtyMolusk]

Howdy- One of each per hunter per year. Have never purchased the combo license.

[Tim Baker]

TS, I hope you’re wrong about the combo licenses but knowing the MDNR I wouldn’t put it past them. I voted for the one buck limit.

Currently, if you shoot a buck or doe during archery season, you can only buy one more buck tag. But you can’t buy an archery tag and then a gun tag come gun season. So if you bow hunt and gun hunt, which do you buy? I’m sure a lot of people buy the combo because it allows a person more flexibility.

I think doe tags should be issued by management units and not statewide. Michigan is too diverse and the deer population varies too much from one area to another to issue them as statewide permits.

I have always bought the combo license but have never filled both tags. I only shoot mature bucks and the opportunity to shoot 2 in one year hasn’t happened. Last year I didn’t shoot a buck with my bow but the two previous years I did. After shooting my first buck in 2000 and 1999 I became even more selective and passed on a few immature bucks.

Tim

[Sarge]

I have never purchased a combo license. The only reason I buy a regular license is on the outside chance that a deer I cannot resist walks by. I shoot doe by choice. Again I do buy a regular license because where I hunt there is that rare trophy and if one stood in my sights I wouldn't want to only have a doe permit in my pocket.

[Trophy Specialist]

Don't quote me on these statistics, but I think I Michigan has about 300,000 bow hunters and about 700,000 gun hunters with about 75% of the bowhunters hunting both seasons. I remember reading that over 600,000 combo licenses were sold last year. Deer hunters have the choice of buying a bow license and a gun licenses separately, which are good for one buck each with their respective weapons, but you can't buy a second bow or gun license. Instead of a separate bow or gun license, deer hunters can buy a combo license good for two bucks with either bow or gun with the second tag being a restricted tag. I know for a fact that some hunters who hunt with both bow and gun buy the separate bow and gun license to avoid getting the restricted license so they can shoot two small bucks. Even so, the vast majority of hunters are buying combo licenses for no other reason than to have a chance to kill two bucks. I think I read where only 1 in 50 hunters actually take two bucks in a season, which is hardly an impact on the resource. So if you managed to kill two bucks last year, hats off to ya, but the odds are against you next year.

[Swamp Monster]

I voted for one buck a year but I do buy a combo license. I do this knowing that I propably will not be lucky enough to see two bucks that I am willing to shoot in the same season, but....you never know. If I happen to take a mature deer during archery season for example, I may have a chance to hunt an area that I do not have a doe permit for during gun season so I will atleast have a legal tag that will allow me to hunt. Doesn't mean I'll shoot anything but if a monster does happen buy I will take him as a second buck. Now, the chances of me taking to mature deer in a season is slim to none and if one of thecombo tags was for a doe in any area of the state, that would be fine to. This way I can hunt where and when I have the oppurtunity. I just enjoy hunting, so the extra tag is a benefit to atleast let me extend my time afield. The cost is not a factor and I would pay the same amount for only one buck tag if thats what it comes to.

[Swamp Monster]

To sum it up I guess, one tag period would be OK and it would make some people think before shooting a small immature animal but I would be dissapointed somewhat even if I taged out on a big buck first thing on opening day, because I wouldn't legally beable to hunt.....and I want to hunt formore than a few hours! I could always hunt with a camera I guess.....

[Trophy Specialist]

I could not vote on the pole (got an error message) but I would have voted for every solution and more. Limiting hunters to buck per season would be OK with me, but only if antler restrictions or some other means were also implemented to protect the young bucks. Otherwise, a one-buck limit would be useless. I also think that on some public lands, there should be lottery drawings for buck tags creating some quality hunting opportunities for folks that don't hunt on private property. I also think that in some areas, where there is a scientifically proven, non-political overpopulation of deer, the earn-a-buck-program would be effective. Wisconsin did this a while back where you couldn't shoot a buck until you shot a doe. As an alternative to the earn-a-buck-program, bucks could be made off-limits in for a season or two in problem areas until the doe numbers were brought down. I also have to admit that I like the current combo license because it gives me a lot of hours of hunting recreation. My dog (Shrike) hates the combo license though and all that nonsense about passing up bucks. He'd much prefer it if I would just go out and shoot the first buck I see and end all that deer hunting foolishness so we could go bird hunting more.

[Pinefarm]

I'd do something along the lines of how they have it in Illinois. I say do away with antlerless only tags and issue everyone 2 either sex tags. Make it so if one chosses to shoot a buck, one buck can be anything and one is 4pt or better. Then if he shoots a doe, he only has one buck tag left. Or someone can shoot 2 does and no bucks. This idea of letting everyone have three doe permits and still two buck tags has gotten us to our present state, in many heavily hunted areas. In the farm land of southern Michigan, issue crop damage permits if necessary. But 5 tags a person is too many.

[boehr]

I have never bought a combo license, I have always just purchased one regular firearm and then also taken a antlerless permit always on public land when drawn or lucky enough to purchase leftovers over the counter like last year for Allegan. I have not shot a buck since the 80's because I have choose not to shoot or there wasn't a good shot. I haven't shot any deer in last two years because I choose not to shoot a particular deer and/or a good shot did not present itself in my opinon.

Again in my opinion, as long as the buck harvest stays about what it presently does, every year, I doubt that the state will go down to one buck. If the majority of all hunters pushed for one buck then they might but I just don't think the majority ever will. I still like the thought of a generic deer license instead of firearm or bow or combo license.

To get rid of the combination license will take a act of the legislature, the DNR can not just change it.

You could keep the combination license and go down to one buck, make the second license for a doe.

To raise license fees also take a act of the legislature but the cost of an anterless license could be raised to the same price as a regular license.

Antlerless licenses are already issued by DMU and not on a state-wide bases.

[CLUB 360]

I like one tag one buck. I agree, I think it would make you think before harvesting a young buck early in the season. I would hate to take a spike on opening day and sit in the cabin the rest of the season.

Just my 2 cents.

[Liver and Onions]

Trophy Specialist,
I am interested in the 1 in 50 getting two bucks. Has anyone else ever read that stat ? I guess it all depends on how much you hunt, how well you hunt, what area you hunt, and if you are very selective in the bucks that you kill. I know several hunters who have gotten 2 bucks for many years in a row. The last time that they didn't get 2, they got 4....I believe that for several years that we could take 4 bucks legally.
L & O

[Pinefarm]

L&O, the limit has always been two. But, the old license system allowed to to buy four. You could buy two bow and turn around and buy two gun. Just like all this other talk of hunters monitering themselves with how many does to shoot and voluntary QDM, the honor system didn't work very well. That's the very reason the combo license came into being, to stop guys from buying four tags. As it is now, I have to do a lot of voids because some guys buy three antlerless tags then buy three more the next week. Once they find out that the DNR is contacting them for over buying, they want to void them out. Presently, there's nothing in the computer system to stop an individual from buying more than three antlerless tags. That's a mistake. While I have a lot of faith in most hunters, the honor system doesn't work. Good sound rules, easily understood by all is what's needed. As far as the two bucks, until the last three dismal years, at least half the guys at our camp shot two bucks every year. Ever since they started one tag for each season and I think that was the late 1970's, then the combo. But now with the numbers way down in some area's, perhaps a simple either sex tag for each season would work. Club 360 is dead right about guys passing bucks. Hell, I only had one either sex tag in Illinois this year and passed on a 16" 10pt. If I had two tags, I'd have shot it for sure. Luckily, my buddy who'd never shot a nice buck before shot it just minutes after I passed. But one tag made me pass because I was looking for a Godzilla Buck.

[MIKE W]

I don't like the idea of shooting a nice buck(8 or better) opening day then not hunting anymore. I like the idea of having a second tag even if it does'nt get filled, at least i'm out in the woods waiting for the big one. I do however like the idea of having 4 points per side on both tags. That would be good for management. I can't believe noone agrees. Everybody says one tag, well, I say shoot your sixer opening day (bow) and then stay home the rest of the season and opening day of gun and see how you like it. You'll change your mind fast.

[redd]

I currently live and bowhunt in Ohio. In the Buckeye State, only one buck may be taken regardless of season. An additional antlerless tag may also be purchased by all hunters. I also have bowhunted in Michigan for the past ten years and can testify that Ohio's system does produce more, mature whitetail bucks. It just makes some hunters a little more selective when shooting their "one" buck. Just drive down and bowhunt the first two weeks of November in SE Ohio and you will experience it first hand. Go Spartans!

[Liver and Onions]

Bob@BBT,
I jumped over to Boehr's question and answer site to ask him about the #of legal bucks. I assume that you are correct since you sold licenses.
L & O

[Duwammer]

Mike W, I'm with you on this one. I'd rather be in the woods knowing i must shoot one with 4 pts. on one side than sitting home done for the season. I have always bought the combo tags. I have also always bought 2 or 3 doe tags. I hunt Private property in both Newaygo and Muskegon county. If one doesn't pan out maybe the other will. I usually try for a state land doe tag for Muskegon also. I haven't shot 2 bucks in i don't know how long. Haven't shot a doe in 3 years. Their usually to scrawney (small) or Button Bucks. So i don't mind spending the extra money to be flexable. If L&O is correct with the 1 in 50 connecting on the second tag. It is obviously a money maker for the DNR. To stop it would mean budget cuts. Or... Go with the one tag idea and those that currently buy the second tag could still donate their money on the honor system.

[Randy Kidd]

I like the system the way it is right now. I hunt with Bow, Gun and Muzzleloader. I also hunt in different parts of the State at different times. I hate to think that if I took a nice sixer ( And I know some of you will say that no six point is a nice deer) That I am restricted to hunting with my doe permit in that DMU for the rest of the year, which would probably mean opening day of gun season. I hunt for two reasons and in this order. First I love to hunt. I can hunt for that eight or better for all of gun season and all of muzzleloader season with no problem. I very rarely connect but I am out there. Second reason is, I hunt for meat. I will not knowingly shoot a button but I have seen and shot spikes my self that were over three years old. If they have a mature body then they are fair game. And I must reply to the suggestion that there should be a lottery for bucks on STATE LAND, Excuse me but since ALL deer are the property of the state, if there is a lottery for bucks on state land there better be one for private property also. It is that kind of elitest attitude that grinds the regular joe who didn't inherit land or cannot afford to buy it

[Pinefarm]

I agree with Redd. When I go down to Illinois for second shotgun, it's one buck. The question is, how many bucks do we need to shoot? We can't have it both ways. We can't complain about not seeing enough nicer bucks, then still complain that we're not happy with only one buck. Which is it? If it's early bow season and a basket 8pt presents a shot, either shot it and be very happy with your buck or pass on it, period. If more people did that, we'd see more nice bucks the next year. We'll never get anywhere by killing 85-90% of available bucks every year. It's that simple.

[Trophy Specialist]

Originally posted by BOB@BBT
L&O, the limit has always been two.
Actually, there was a period back in the 80s when a deer hunter could legally shoot four bucks in one season. It started out in just the Lower Peninsula and was later adopted for the U.P. Later on they reduced the bag limit to two bucks, but still allowed hunters to buy four tags; then came our present combo license.

Liver and Onions, I know the 1 in 50 number seems way off, but you have to remember that old adage of, "10% of the hunters kill 90% of the deer." I've killed two Michigan bucks per season every year for as long as I can remember, but I also hunt harder than anybody else that I know does. I hunt every day from Oct. 1 (or earlier out-of-state) until my tags are used up, then I hunt with my camera. I also haven't shot a young buck in many years. I know several other people who are just as successful as I am, but I also know many more that are lucky to get one buck every 10 years. My father-in-law went 50 years before he finally shot his fist buck in 2000 and then he shot two bucks in the same season. Go figure.

[Pinefarm]

That could be because we weren't here in the 80's. So, I have no license experience from then, just working from hunting memory. I do know that in the pre-combo early 90's, the limit was two, but you could still buy four tags.

[Tom Morang]

Buck Regulations Overview (this overview was done by John Urbain and Bill Moritz of the DNR Wildlife Division a few years ago)....tm


1859: First legislative act regarding deer.

1921: Buck law allows hunters to take only one antlered deer. Camp license allows party of 4 or more hunters to take extra buck for camp meat. Three inch antler minimum established.

1925: November 15-30 set as deer season (same since except for experiments during 1962-67)

1948: Entire state opened to deer hunting with firearms for first time since 1891.
Firearms limited to shotguns in Southern MI

1956: Beginning of modern antlerless harvests with use of any-deer licenses in specified areas.

1965: All counties open for either sex bow hunting (Oct 1 - Nov 5). Late bow added in 1968.

1975: Muzzleloader season established, bucks only.

1986: Second Deer licenses made available statewide for firearm and in LP for archery.

1989: Hunters Choice Deer Hunting Permit replaced by a Bonus-Antlerless-only Permit.

1991: Hunters restricted to 2 antlered deer during all deer seasons combined.

1997: Second buck licenses valid only for antlered bucks with at least 4 antler points on 1 side, one or more inches in length.

1998: Second archery and firearm buck licenses eliminated.

1998: Combination Deer License established.

1998: Antler Point Restrictions placed on bucks on South Fox, Drummond Island, and DMU 101.

1999: Antler Point Restrictions placed on bucks in DMU 107.



In Brian Frawley's 2000 Michigan Deer Harvest Report he states that 5.3% of all deer hunters killed two bucks in 2000.



tm

[mich buckmaster]

TS,

I buy the combo license every year for the sole fact of shooting two trophy bucks with my bow. If I shoot an eight point lets say on my bow tag, then I would be done buck hunting for bow and arrow. If I buy a combo tag I can shoot two bucks.

Now, I am in favor of changing the rules for a one buck per season until we get the buck to doe ratio to at least 50/50!

[Pinefarm]

Tom, that 5.3% shooting a second buck sure seems low to me. From the mid-80's to around '98, my dad, his hunting buddy Bob, my friend Geoff and myself always shot two bucks. And assorted guys at the camp shot two. Plus everyone here at the store always shot two. Now, I realize we live here and hunt far more than most statewide, but that just seems low.

[Old Hunter]

Those who buy the Combo Licenses hunt with both Bow & Gun, this does not mean they shoot 2 Bucks.

[farmlegend]

Bob, it's my recollection that the official estimated number of hunters taking two bucks has been rather steady over the last several years, ranging roughly in the 5-6% range.

My experience parallels yours; my seat-of-the-pants observations seem to indicate a larger proportion of hunters taking two bucks. Currently, there's a fair number of guys hunting nearby me that seem to take two bucks annually, plus a few button bucks for good measure (for what it's worth, nearly all of the antlered bucks taken by these guys are 1.5 years old; and if that's what you're hunting for in my area, taking two of these juveniles is not difficult to do, particularly in the early archery season).

I don't have evidence that the Department's numbers are inaccurate; perhaps there is strong regional variation, and that a higher proportion of hunters are taking two bucks in higher-density areas.

[Trophy Specialist]

Ok, for you folks who want all the Michigan deer hunting facts and statisics as compiled from the 2000 deer seasons, go to http://www.midnr.org/pdfs/hunting/deer_00harvest.pdf

Be warned though, the report is 35-pages long and keep in mind that DNR has warned that the 2001 stats will likely show a 10% to 50% decline in the deer kill numbers.

[OTIS]

Voted to keep things as they are. One buck is not enough for me. I have shot 2 bucks in my life so I am overdue to start catching up so I can average one a year. :D :D

[Pinefarm]

Farmlegend, you're right about the small bucks. Most of what we shot were young. Even the 7-8pt's were little scubby things. But, that's what we did back then. It's only the last few years that we all got tired of shooting what the guys in Illinois call "Michigan Trophies". LOL I suspect my time in Illinois has changed my perspective also. In the last couple years I've passed up a 16" 10pt and about a 17" 8pt. Both were nice bucks, but were only 2 1/2 year olds and lacked heavy antler mass and body weight. After that, it's kinda tough to feel good about shooting a 1 1/2 year old basket 6 or 7pt with potential here in Michigan. Especially two of them.

[Liver and Onions]

5.3% or 1 in 19 hunters taking 2 bucks sounds about right to me. My barber thought 1 in 20 sounded about right. Barbers usually get a pretty good cross-section of thoughts and ideas.I not think that this site is representive of what Michigan hunters think about the Combo license or 1 buck per hunter idea. Outside of this site, every hunter that I've talked to likes the combo license and so do I.
L & O

[redd]

Bob in Baldwin,

It works in Illinois and it works in Ohio. If all I want is venison, I can kill up to four antlerles deer in selected "Urban Zones" in Ohio. I hold one of the rare Lifetime Archery licenses in Michigan and hunt both Michigan and my home state of Ohio. The deer herd in Michigan would see the positive effects of a one buck limit in several years. Also, it may help if Michigan used mandatory check stations for deer harvested to better track the herds population and health.

[Liver and Onions]

Redd,
I've never heard of a lifetime bow license. What year did you buy that and how much did it cost ? I guess that I am not surprised that a person from Ohio likes the idea of manadatory check stations....you guys don't seem to mind stopping at toll booths every time you get on or off the expressway either.
L & O

[redd]

L & O,

The Lifetime Licenses were offered for a couple of years in the mid to late 80's. The Lifetime Sportsman License cost around $1,000.00 and the Lifetime Archery License cost $285.00. At the time I bought the license I had about $300.00 in the bank but figured it to be a worthwhile investment (which it was). Because I now live out of state, I most follow the same regulations regarding number of deer killed as any other non resident. Have a good holiday.

Redd

[NEMichsportsman]

Originally posted by BOB@BBT
I'd do something along the lines of how they have it in Illinois. I say do away with antlerless only tags and issue everyone 2 either sex tags. Make it so if one chosses to shoot a buck, one buck can be anything and one is 4pt or better. Then if he shoots a doe, he only has one buck tag left. Or someone can shoot 2 does and no bucks. This idea of letting everyone have three doe permits and still two buck tags has gotten us to our present state, in many heavily hunted areas. In the farm land of southern Michigan, issue crop damage permits if necessary. But 5 tags a person is too many.


Rather than re-state in my own clumsy fashion, I think Bobs plan makes a lot of sense. It allows a lot of freedom for the hunter, while restoring some sanity to the current process.


jp

[H2OFowl'er]

Hmmmm...such a question. I would vote for one buck per year, but would also vote for one buck per bow and one buck per gun, both having antler restrictions. As far as why I buy the combo tag, i hunt both bow and gun and the combo allows for flexibility. Would like to see antler restrictions on any tag scenario MDNR comes up with. We have been passing young bucks for five or so years now, and what a difference that makes. For those that just need to shoot two bucks, why not try a doe?? Just wondering. For those of you that don’t want to shoot a buck on opening day and spend the rest of the season in camp, well put simply DON'T!!! Either don’t shoot the first deer you see (or the old brown is down theory) or shoot that buck and then enjoy mother nature, it is very enjoyable to just sit there and do nothing but watch mother nature....

[Trophy Specialist]

Originally posted by Liver and Onions
I guess that I am not surprised that a person from Ohio likes the idea of manadatory check stations....you guys don't seem to mind stopping at toll booths every time you get on or off the expressway either.
L & O
That's a good one L&O....LOL

I hate those damn toll booths.

[Kerry Stout]

I would like the combo tags, but with point restrictions on both tags. I bow hunt in Mecosta county and gun hunt in Keewenaw county, so would still like the opportunity to continue to do both. Most years I do Kill 2 bucks, and during the 80's when legal, I did take 4 for several years, although looking back now my hunting has changed greatly. Many of the bucks I killed back then, I would let walk now. After 33 years hunting in Mecosta county, with the 1st 12 years or so limited to 1 buck per year, I don't think going back to that limit is going to make any difference in the buck kill. What has made a difference is the unlimited doe permits in my area. I've seen more bucks in december the last 3 years than all of the previous 30, although I rarely see a buck during the early season that is older than 1 and 1/2. That is why I would prefer the antler restriction, to allow more bucks to reach maturity.

[redd]

Originally posted by Trophy Specialist

That's a good one L&O....LOL

I hate those damn toll booths.

Hey Trophy Specialist, I bet you wouldn't mind the $4.00 in tolls if you had a 150" whitetail in the bed of your truck with an Ohio tag on it's rack.

[fishandhunt]

Do the math on the 5.3% of hunters bagging two bucks. 750,000 * .053 = 39,750 hunters shooting an extra buck.

Put another way, that’s 479 bucks PER COUNTY.

Looked at another way, in 2000, 285,911 bucks were killed. These 5.3% of hunters killed 79,500 of them or 27.8 % of all bucks killed!

5 – 6% of the hunter are killing 30% of the bucks!

Doing away with the second license would leave roughly one additional buck per square mile of huntable land in Michigan.

[Joe Archer]

I finally voted on this topic. I decided the lesser of two evils would be to keep the current combo license system. As others have mentioned, I do not want my bow hunting season to end early in October. In my area right now, doe are NOT a huntable resource because the numbers are next to nothing. Also, a one buck limit would just hurt the honest hunters. The others would still shoot another buck and use a tag purchased for someone else. Yeah, I know it's not right but we all know it happens, don't we? <----<<<

[Whit1]

F&H's math is an eye opener. as a raw number 5.3% seems mundane enough. However, when it is applied to the deer harvest in real numbers it should catch the attention of all who want to see more bucks. Between that and the button buck harvesting that takes place far too many bucks are being eliminated from the herd.

If I don't want my bow season to end in early October, then I don't shoot a buck in early October. Actually I see most of my larger antlered bucks in November anyway.

As for the "illegals", generally speaking those people will take illegal deer anyway. The average poacher has a mindset concerning poaching and no amount of regulation is going to change that mind et. The "average" poacher might include anyone who hunts, there is no set stereotype according to studies done of poaching activities. But that is another matter of discussion.

The simplest way to increase the buck population is to shoot fewer bucks.

[utan]

What will a one buck per season accomplish?

A one buck per season will just keep the gun only and the bow only hunters from taking two bucks.

If you can kill one buck in bow season and one buck in gun season what is the difference between that and the combination tags? Most guys who kill two bucks in a year are usually two season hunters anyway, they kill one with a bow and one with a gun.


IF a change is needed in the buck kill I think in order to be fair to everyone you should only be allowed to take one buck per YEAR.

[Old Hunter]

I have been deer hunting since 1946 and would never think of killing 2 deer buck or doe, seeing deer and being in the woods is what hunting is all about. I don't know how anyone can use more than 1 deer anyway. :confused:

[Bob S]

Originally posted by Old Hunter
I don't know how anyone can use more than 1 deer anyway. I ate two last year pretty much all by myself.

[hangoo]

Lets just make it easy, one Bow hunting tag per year to kill buck or doe. and one firearm tag a year to kill buck or doe.
So if you're a bow hunter and a gun hunter you can have the privelage to kill two deer, but if you only do one, you can only kill one buck. All this combo license stuff causes confusion year after year

[Liv4Huntin']

It would seem that one buck per bow and one per gun season would discriminate AGAINST those hunters who cannot use a compound or stick bow any longer due to physical limitations ..... but for whatever reason, are not in the catagory of using a cross bow..... Those hunters who wish to hunt during bow season but cannot, as the rules now stand.

I cannot agree with that solution.

One buck per year .... take it however you choose (legally).

Its been done before in this state, and if enough people IN FACT want to lower the buck harvest, it CAN be done again.

Lets just not discriminate agains those hunters who, because of age or physical limitations, can no longer pull a bow.

~ m ~

[Shoes]

I like the combo license. Since I drive to the UP, it provides incentive and flexibility to be able to spend more time hunting rather than take a weeks vacation to shoot something opening morning, then either drive home or sit around waiting while your hunting pardner(s) work to fill their tags. If I don't fill them, I can still bow hunt in December.

I too hunted back when there was a one-buck-and-your-done-for-the-season limit. The deer herd has changed dramatically. Last year a record number of 'book' bucks were taken....at this time, I don't see a need to change.

[farmlegend]

Shoes, you do not need a combo tag in order to bowhunt in December.

When you refer to a record number of "book" bucks taken, you must be referring to 2000, and not 2001 (last year). To my knowledge, only two Booner class bucks were taken in Michigan last year, which is similar to the historical average for our state, and far under 2000's total.

[NorthJeff]

I can also guarentee that if there is an increase in book bucks and large body weights, it will be because of the many hunters encouraging and practicing QDM on the properties they hunt, not because of the current management practices of the state.

[Shoes]

farmlegend - your right, I don't need the combo to bowhunt in December, but it gives me the flexibility to continue rifle hunting beyond an opening day kill in November. If unsuccessful in filling the second tag in November, I can continue the hunt with a bow in December. For me, its a matter of having more options.

I wasn't clear on the 'book' buck comment. I didn't mean Booners, but rather CBM, and I believe it was the 2001 fall season. I have made mistakes before and am willing to stand corrected. Either way, the caliber of bucks taken over the last two seasons has been impressive.

[redd]

Originally posted by farmlegend
Shoes, you do not need a combo tag in order to bowhunt in December.

When you refer to a record number of "book" bucks taken, you must be referring to 2000, and not 2001 (last year). To my knowledge, only two Booner class bucks were taken in Michigan last year, which is similar to the historical average for our state, and far under 2000's total.

Farmlegend, it is ashame that only a couple of B&C bucks were killed in Michigan last year. I think that fact alone would encourage more hunters to adopt a one buck per year policy. If a hunter wants more venison, shoot a doe each year. Michigan should be producing a lot more big bucks considering all the available deer habitat.

[Whit1]

Originally posted by Old Hunter
I I don't know how anyone can use more than 1 deer anyway. :confused:

My wife and I take care of eating two deer a year with no problem.

[don'tgoenough]

I believe the 2-buck limit under our current regulations is fine, but I also believe that we should go to a mandatory check-in like other states have gone to. Not everyone is going to take their 2-buck limit but a mandatory chek-in might hinder some people for taking their 3, 4, or five bucks a year. Just my opinion though!

[Rut-N-Strut]

I voted for the current combo license but would easily vote for only 1 buck tag instead of voting for antler spread or point restictions if those were the only 3 choices.

[Ringneck]

Common sence tells me that 99% of the hunters of deer in this state are probably limited in their ability to hunt deer by the fact that they have to make a living and support themselves.

Unless they own the property they hunt on and live in close proximity to it they are also limited to short time periods to scout and observe.

Given just the two above observations it seems that the greatest potential for harvesting a trophy deer is nothing but luck.


Granted that acquiring additional skills improves anyones chances, however with over 700,000 hunters why should we allow those with the additional skill to harvest more then 1 buck?

[dieguy]

mandatory check in - yes
combo license - yes
I think ringneck hit it just right, i know with my wotk schedule and and two young kids, scouting is limited and time in the stand is limited, luck has everything to do with me, to even see a deer.

[L0ngbeard]

I like the combo tags. I like the chance to kill two bucks a year but I also like the 4 points rule. It gives some smaller bucks a chance to grow up

I also think that there should be a mandatory check in.





L0ngbeard

[bearstretch]

Howdy. Yeah, I think that the one buck per year would be a good deal to start with. Where I hunt, not many bucks, and if there is a buck, a huge part of the time it's no bigger than a spike. Just my opinion, but I don't think it sounds so bad. Maybe get the big boys back. Could work. Have a good one.

Stretch

[D.C.U.P.]

I have been passing on little bucks the past few seasons in an effort to get more and bigger ones in the area...too bad not everyone else does. :(

Does taste just fine to me, and I like watching the little guys try to "score."

My current self-imposed rule is: "8 points or better." If anyone wants to hunt my property, the same rules apply.

[Chuck]

I say one buck per hunter as long as it has 3" antler on one side or better.

Also every hunter gets one doe tag and in special units a drawing for a second doe tag when needed.

I average 1 buck every 3 years getting 2 only one time. One year I shot a doe, 8pt, and a 4 pt. I will be lucky to ever repeat that.

For all you guys who only want to shoot 8pt or better you could buy a 100 $ trophy tag good for a 8pt buck or better. Or you could try hunting public for a while and see what its like to hunt a really smart buck!:) IM ribbing

But in a way I think rules should be different for public land hunting. It is harder hunting, anything that lives past its first birthday is very smart. I think it would be nice to havemore 8pt or better deer running around but would we see them on public becouse they are hunted so hard?? I see nice deer now but they are hard to hunt.

Unfortunatly I see the trophy hunters pushing out every one else till thhey get what they want, and that will be a liscence that is $100.00 or more and big buck restrictions. This will push out the average joe hunter who cant justify spending 100 for a weekend hunt to not see any deer. I already feel at timesz its hard to afford it the way it is.

[Blackeagle]

I think the One buck per year idea is the best. This allows each person, and new hunters most of all, to take a buck of his/her choice. Point restrictions don't do that. A 4 point rule would protect not only 1.5 yr. old bucks but many 2.5 yr. olds as well in much of the northern part of the state. And in the southern most 1/3 of the state it won't protect many of the 1.5 yr. old bucks as they have little crown or basket racks of 8 points. I havn't seen a 1.5 yr. spike in years in my area. Most 1.5 yr. bucks are 6-8 here, 4 pointers are more rare than 6's or 8's. I'll grant that is a blessing for those in my area where there are massive amounts of grain crops and small amounts of hay. But a point rule wouldn't do nearly as much here as would a one buck rule.

I could live with the point rule no problem if it also contained a 1 buck rule as well.

[redd]

Blackeagle,

I have shot several bucks in the southern part of the state and the average 1.5 year old buck does have a basket 6 or 8pt. I took a 2.5 year old off of public land in '95 that had nine points with a 16" spread. What a difference a year makes! Take it from a bowhunter that hunts both Ohio and Michigan...a one buck limit does make a big difference. I see P & Y minimum bucks every fall in Ohio but rarely see one in Michigan. I am not for point restrictions because I know how hard it can be to kill a buck in some parts of the state. However, even if a small percentage let 1.5 year olds walk, the quality of the herd would improve dramatically.

[Robert29478]

I have been giving alot of thought to this topic.. I do like the combo liscense but only because I get to hunt more.. However I hunt public land and all I ever see is does or spikes.. If there is bigger bucks in the area I haven't seen them.. I would be just fine with the one buck liscense due to the fact I would like to see bigger bucks... Another thing I thought about is the combo liscense by making one liscense 3 or more and the second liscense 4 or more... What would we be giving up by doing something like this?? Maybe a couple of years of not getting little spike or fork horn bucks?? What would they be like if they get the chance to grow?? I would be willing to do something like this to help the deer herd... I would also take a couple of does to make up for the bucks I have taken... At least I could still keep hunting but it would also be more of a challenge to take a good buck... Maybe that is what some of us need any ways... Maybe most of us are scared of the challenge?? This is just how I feel about it..

Robert

[Bow_Hunter]

Just leave it alone. Let's focus on making what we have better and more accurate.

If the DNR made it manditory to register every deer you harvested, they would have a better handle on the numbers.

This would not mean taking every deer to a field office, but it would mean sending in a card to the DNR stating the facts, just like the kill tag to them. This would be for sucsessful and unsucsessful hunters alike. If you get a license you send in a responce. If you do not send in the responce card then maybe you do not get a block permit or doe permit or second license the next year.

The card is easy, did you get a deer? yes or no. if yes, point(s) on each side, date of harvest, county of harvest, weapon used.
Easy and simple.

Ok, this is only an idea. More laws and changes will not fix this. Let's focus on making what we have better.

If the DNR has better number, then they can better manage the licenses that are issued.

[caznik]

It dont matter how its done there are to many hog hunters out here today that shoot more than 8 bucks a year and that really pisses me off. I know other hunters like me some years dont even see a buck gun hunting. I go for 1 buck per yer and 2 does. Good luck deer hunting this year............Rich:)

[Old Hunter]

I purchase the Combo License so that I may hunt from Oct into Jan. I like being in the woods wheather or not I get a deer, it is up to me to shoot or not shoot, last seasons I passed on a few deer as I don't really need the meat. Hunting is something I do for the pleasure of the sport not killing.;)

[rb1]

I hunted on private land most of my life seen deer evey day; Got my buck every year just (one) didn't need any more. Gave it up to hunt on public land; have more fun. being in deer camp. Still see a lot of deer. we still manage to have one by the end of the first day.
Past up a lot of bucks for one reason or another. To have another hunter see the buck that I have been watching and shoot and shoot and get all excited with what they call buck fever; then wonder why he can't hit him.:D My son always manages to get one or two he has more mouths to feed.

I have bought a deer license for over 46 years and I will still buy one until the day I die. I just love to get there in the woods and enjoy nature. There is nothing finer in the world than to take your grand children with you and crawl on your belly up to an knoll; and peek over the top to watch the wild life on the other side.
And teach them how to enjoy what you haved enjoyed all your life. This the legacy that I will give them. RB1

[Old Hunter]

Well said rb1, I wish all hunters felt the way we do. ;)