Michigan Sportsman Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,471 Posts
Hopefully no more animals positive for CWD will be found. We don't want to become complacent however and squander the heightened attention of late on the need to reduce the deer population in many areas of Michigan. That's going to require more does killed. I'm asking how we educate the the more typical Michigan deer hunter on his/her need to shoot does. Or do you think its not an educational problem? I'm not asking for what regulations should change. So if you want to say "give out more antlerless deer permits in the SLP :evil: " tie it to how that educates the common deer hunter ( and give the "evil" emoticon a break, you ain't fooling anyone). Many of these areas have plenty of extra tags, so if you say the extra tags are educating hunters, the hunters are real slow learners. Most of the guys/gals here aren't your typical deer hunter and have their views on the need for more antlerless kills.

We have an opportunity here to better get the hunter's attention than at most other times. What do we do with it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,900 Posts
I share your sentiments, Direwolfe, but in my humble opinion no amount of education or coaxing is going to sway those hunters who would otherwise be stubborn as far as what is best for the herd. It is my belief that unless regulations were such that a far greater number of antlerless deer are harvested each year in the DMU's which need it than antlered deer, there is no way that the herd numbers will ever be balanced. This is the main reason that I have advocated a blind license system for those DMU's with a high population of antlerless deer. I have mentioned this many times on these forums and mostly it is met with very little if any further comment. Look at it this way...the state of Michigan has an elk hunt each year. The hunt is conducted by means of a lottery/point system to obtain a tag. When the successful tag recipient is notified, it is then revealed which animal the tag is for, be it an any elk tag or an antlerless tag. The state could do the same for the deer hunters, only instead of a lottery/point system they could sell a deer hunting license and then and only then would the hunter know which tag he had, either for an any sex or antlerless only deer. Licenses could be sold according to the DMU that the hunter wanted to hunt, and those DMU's with high deer numbers would obviously have more antlerless tags available than buck tags. However, this would probably never fly seeing as how there is already such a stink about the no-baiting laws. In my mind, the true hunters would still buy a deer license and hunt accordingly and the rest would cry all the way out of state to hunt. Just a thought, but I would not be surprised if in my lifetime the NRC adopts such a plan, especially if the deer population continues to rise in some areas.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,721 Posts
I share your sentiments, Direwolfe, but in my humble opinion no amount of education or coaxing is going to sway those hunters who would otherwise be stubborn as far as what is best for the herd. It is my belief that unless regulations were such that a far greater number of antlerless deer are harvested each year in the DMU's which need it than antlered deer, there is no way that the herd numbers will ever be balanced. This is the main reason that I have advocated a blind license system for those DMU's with a high population of antlerless deer. I have mentioned this many times on these forums and mostly it is met with very little if any further comment. Look at it this way...the state of Michigan has an elk hunt each year. The hunt is conducted by means of a lottery/point system to obtain a tag. When the successful tag recipient is notified, it is then revealed which animal the tag is for, be it an any elk tag or an antlerless tag. The state could do the same for the deer hunters, only instead of a lottery/point system they could sell a deer hunting license and then and only then would the hunter know which tag he had, either for an any sex or antlerless only deer. Licenses could be sold according to the DMU that the hunter wanted to hunt, and those DMU's with high deer numbers would obviously have more antlerless tags available than buck tags. However, this would probably never fly seeing as how there is already such a stink about the no-baiting laws. In my mind, the true hunters would still buy a deer license and hunt accordingly and the rest would cry all the way out of state to hunt. Just a thought, but I would not be surprised if in my lifetime the NRC adopts such a plan, especially if the deer population continues to rise in some areas.
Skipper if I understand you correctly are you saying that you get your tag and it will tell you what you can shoot (doe or buck)? If this is correct I see yur point on why the state would do that but I don't think it would sit well with most hunters. I spend the whole year preparing my self for shooting a mature buck, I also take at least 2 does a year usually during the lull of October or in the late season. I wouldn't be happy if I got an anteless only tag but I would still hunt reguardless. I think the one buck rule would work better that would make the hunter be more choosy about the buck they shoot and I would assume if they wanted more meat for the freezer they would then take a doe. The deer season is 3 months long and I couldn't imagine shooting a nice buck in the early part of October and then calling it a year. I my self would be out there hunting does until I tagged out. Of course that just me (and I'msure alot of others) and on the property where I hunt we have alot of deer and the fear of shooting too many doesn't really exist, at least not yet. I hunt a 280 acre farm in montcalm county and we usually shoot about a dozen does every year. As for what the neighbors are shooting I can't be to certain they say they shoot does, but I have only seen them hauling away a couple in the 8 years I have been hunting there. I do know that they only shoot mature bucks and they don't like it when they find out someone has shot a young one. Another option that I think would help in certain areas would be the earn a buck rule that would force hunters to take a doe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,900 Posts
Skipper if I understand you correctly are you saying that you get your tag and it will tell you what you can shoot (doe or buck)? If this is correct I see yur point on why the state would do that but I don't think it would sit well with most hunters. I spend the whole year preparing my self for shooting a mature buck, I also take at least 2 does a year usually during the lull of October or in the late season. I wouldn't be happy if I got an anteless only tag but I would still hunt reguardless. I think the one buck rule would work better that would make the hunter be more choosy about the buck they shoot and I would assume if they wanted more meat for the freezer they would then take a doe. The deer season is 3 months long and I couldn't imagine shooting a nice buck in the early part of October and then calling it a year. I my self would be out there hunting does until I tagged out. Of course that just me (and I'msure alot of others) and on the property where I hunt we have alot of deer and the fear of shooting too many doesn't really exist, at least not yet. I hunt a 280 acre farm in montcalm county and we usually shoot about a dozen does every year. As for what the neighbors are shooting I can't be to certain they say they shoot does, but I have only seen them hauling away a couple in the 8 years I have been hunting there. I do know that they only shoot mature bucks and they don't like it when they find out someone has shot a young one. Another option that I think would help in certain areas would be the earn a buck rule that would force hunters to take a doe.
You're right, it would not sit well with most hunters. Just like the baiting ban doesn't sit well with most hunters. It is only an idea that I just happen to be all for. Hey, they do it at the Shiawassee National Wildlife refuge, but they do it with a lottery/point system like with the elk hunt. Those hunts are a deer and elk management hunt. Someday it is my belief that the NRC and DNR will conduct a deer management hunt in those DMU's that are over-populated. Perhaps by using a blind license system like I described. Yes, it would indeed be very unpopular. This is just one way that they could do it and have any kind of chance of putting some kind of a dent in the deer over-population problem. Sure, you may not draw a tag for a mature buck, but what is more important? Harvesting that big buck or making things better for the herd as a whole? Like I said, the true hunters and stewards of the resource would welcome such an idea. This is not saying that you are not a true hunter or a steward. I too like to shoot big bucks. But with all of the whining that I hear from Michigan deer hunters about Michigan lagging far behind some of our surrounding states, this is just another way of getting our herd more in balance. Though I would also support the one-buck rule, by assuming that the hunting public would be choosy in shooting their buck, I highly doubt it. We have had one-buck-rule for many years more than the current regs and they still shot whatever was legal. The topic of the thread was educating the hunting public to shoot more does. My opinion is that education will not do it. It must be regulated, with either EAB or the blind license system. By forcing the hunters to manage the deer herd. And like I have said in the past, the deer management could be very easy. It is the hunter management that is the stumbling block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,664 Posts
We need to shoot does but for some of us that hunt multiple areas of the state it doesn't take long to limit out on tag purchases. I get invited to use DMAP tags but that doesn't mean I wouldn't shoot a few more if more tags were available. I own property in 5 counties plus I'm invited to hunt in several others so it's a balancing act to know where to apply or purchase over the counter tags. I won't punch a tag in the wrong DMU or use someone elses for that matter, the risk doesn't out weigh the rewards.

Education is a great tool but who is going to be the messenger? Education requires a teacher of some sort, that teacher could be this site but readership is limited to a small percentage of the state's total hunters. The hunting guide doesn't work; you don't have to go any farther than this site to see many don't bother to read it. QDMA has free seminars but many of them seem to conflict with my limited free time schedule so I'll assume that's true for many sportsman.

Public TV may work but Kelly has received an offer to move south and Jimmy isn't nearly as pretty. :lol: (Did I just say that outloud?) We need to find a teacher for education to reach the masses of SLP hunters. I don't have the answer to that. Just my 2 cents.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,721 Posts
You guys are right we need a teacher. Qdma does the best it can to get the word out to the public but it seems to be a slow process. Alot of guys are coming around to state wide management idea. My father in law who has always been a good hunter but not very choosy. He used to shoot any buck and lots of does. But from listening to me and others (Jim Shockey, he loves that guy) he finally has said "I aint shootin no more little bucks" and he hasn't. He has not shot a buck in 2 years and this is a guy who shot his limit every year that I have know him. He does shoot his share of does too. I think we need some regs to change but like you guys said its educating the hunters that really needs to be done. It amazes me that there are still hunters who believe it is bad to shoot does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,706 Posts
You guys are right we need a teacher. Qdma does the best it can to get the word out to the public but it seems to be a slow process. Alot of guys are coming around to state wide management idea. My father in law who has always been a good hunter but not very choosy. He used to shoot any buck and lots of does. But from listening to me and others (Jim Shockey, he loves that guy) he finally has said "I aint shootin no more little bucks" and he hasn't. He has not shot a buck in 2 years and this is a guy who shot his limit every year that I have know him. He does shoot his share of does too. I think we need some regs to change but like you guys said its educating the hunters that really needs to be done. It amazes me that there are still hunters who believe it is bad to shoot does.
Please speak for yourself, as I do not require a "teacher". What I require is a professional game agency that makes decision based on science, not politics. Yes, we can all dream.
Dan
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,463 Posts
Well Direwolf, this is a worthwhile topic coming at time when we may see a turn in attitudes.

The CWD and Bait Ban has created a nearly statewide dynamic that we probably haven't seen before. It has hunters' attention. It has the regulators' attention. If you cut through the angst contained in many many of these M-S postings on these two issues you can see a consensus building that "we have too many damn deer."

Lord knows it ain't unanimous. And no doubt it is county specific. But, there is a growing chorus.

My point, is that there may be far more receptivity to changing the pitches in the game.....receptivity by both hunters & regulators.

..........

I think Skipprs' idea on a blind drawing or blind license has merit. A different "pitch". There are a whole bunch of those different pitches out there that heretofore haven't been thrown: EAB, AR, MAR, different mix with the Combo, drawings, lotteries, etc. It appears a time is approaching where these tactics may well be re-visited.

.........................

Regarding 'education'. I am of the opinion that the change in attitude/behavior in getting our SLP herd under control needs to come from "Landowners". Hunter behavior will follow landowner direction....as in "it's my land, my rules". Educating the landowner is the real challenge of education.

Once the landowner completely absorbs the idea that he is in control of what is killed on his land....not the hunter.....and that the deer most in need of killing are female deer then things will begin to change.

The SLP hunting experience is overwhelmingly a 'private land' experience. Hunters need permission. They need 'access'. When landowners fully comprehend that with that need they get the leverage. They get to establish how many females will be taken, how few males will be taken if any, which males will be taken, and on and on. Hunters will hunt what they are allowed to hunt. They need to be the tool, not the driver, in getting our herd reduced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,180 Posts
I don't think any amount of education will get hunters to change thiere desire to take mainly bucks. Maybe earn-a-buck is needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
880 Posts
Unfortunately before these "traditionally" linked hunters choose to be educated they need to see success or proof that it works. Success sells and the more you can do to show new age QDM principles work and continuously improve your local herd, habitat and your quality of hunting experience the more "traditionalist" will jump from their boat and swim on over to yours.

Best of luck it has been a slow process in my neck of the woods!
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top