Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

Do you support Statewide Antler Point Restrictions?

  • Yes

    Votes: 277 67.7%
  • No

    Votes: 132 32.3%
Status
Not open for further replies.
101 - 110 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,920 Posts

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,867 Posts
Twodogs,

The fear is, after we get some kind of statewide APR's, all the time, effort and 1000's of posts railing against changes will be proven wrong.

For some, fighting changes has become personal and they have a personal investment in fighting the DNR and changes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,700 Posts
ATTENTION AR WORK GROUP:
AR's are not for everyone, I do it by choice, at least I did prior to the state mandate in 452 this year. And the new regs in the TB zone imo are just plain stupid. I have no interest in shooting a spike or fork, but I'm not going to tell the guy hunting on state land what he can and cant shoot.

It that better Neal???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,529 Posts
AR's are not for everyone, I do it by choice, at least I did prior to the state mandate in 452 this year. And the new regs in the TB zone imo are just plain stupid. I have no interest in shooting a spike or fork, but I'm not going to tell the guy hunting on state land what he can and cant shoot.
:yeahthat:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,158 Posts
Discussion Starter · #105 ·
I have repeatedly made the following request:

Comments will be allowed, however please direct them to the APR work group and not eachother. This forum will follow the same rules and guidelines as the whitetail forum.

Take your debates elsewhere. Last warning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,920 Posts
This is the 168 pg report, On the 26 year study conducted at the Kerr whitetail research facility. It explains in detail including photo's and graphs the effect of high grading on the deer herd.

High Grading could result from Antler point restrictions, With the long term effect of reducing the average antler size.

The workgroup should read and consider this study.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_w7000_0827.pdf

example...pg 48

"When starting a quality antler program calculate the proper number of deer a range should carry for habitat improvement. From this carrying capacity number, calculate how many does should be on this range if it were at a desired buck to doe ratio (somewhere between 1:1 to1:2). You now know the base number of does that you want to carry on your range. Remove does to that base number. Calculate the number of poor antlered males and other males that need to be removed to achieve the desired buck to doe ratio. Now forget about buck to doe ratios. Remove the calculated percent of the quality males and all the poor-antlered males. Don‘t worry about skewing the buck to doe ratio but be sure you remove at least enough males to achieve carrying capacity. Remember the example of 10 good bucks and 100 does producing 100 fawns. Half those fawns will be males and half will be females. The next year‘s buck to doe ratio will be closer to a one to one and less poor antlered males will be in the population. Because of the heritability of antler quality, over a period of years, the need to cull severely will lessen and more mature, better antlered males will be in the population. The population will begin to move to the desired buck to doe ratio. On the Kerr Wildlife Management Area, hunters are allowed to harvest any buck with 4 points or less and bucks with an antler spread that is wider than their ears. This insures that yearling bucks with the best antlers remain in the breeding population. Special antlerless hunts are also held to remove surplus does."

pg 49

Many people see the antler quality issue as —trophy management“ to be applied to large ranches with deer proof fences. The real application of this management knowledge is for areas with heavy hunting pressure and large numbers of young, poor quality antlered deer. Present hunting systems place greater hunting pressure on the young better quality antlered deer. If acceptable antler quality can be produced at 2 or 3 years of age, then there is less need to maintain bucks on the range until they are 5 or 6 years of age. By redistributing the harvest between the lesser quality and better quality antlered deer, more age and quality antlers will be added to the population while maintaining the deer herd at carrying capacity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,609 Posts
I voted yes, and I would predict it will make a huge difference. Sure, point rules don't promise 1 1/2 year olds survival. I took a 1 1/2 year old in Wyoming that had was a 5x7 (white-tailed deer). It will help bucks reach maturity. We've practiced point restrictions on our property since 1998, and it's paid off. On about 180 acres in NLP we've taken around 20 bucks that were 2 1/2 or older, most scored around 100 inches. Not monsters, but nice bucks. Prior to that we shot the first buck we saw, and took only 4 bucks that were respectable in 12 years. We typically find about three or four shed from yearlings each spring.

Not many guys would pass up a healthy 2 1/2 year old in Michigan, and many would probably mount it. I disagree with the idea of the "Michigan Trophy", I think any county in Michigan could produce 150-160 inch bucks. It is a matter of age, we just don't have many 5 1/2 year old bucks out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,452 Posts
Voluntary?-Yes........Statewide mandatory?-NO, NEVER, EVER!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,516 Posts
Voluntary?-Yes........Statewide mandatory?-NO, NEVER, EVER!
ditto. The quality of the deer, the hunt or the resulting meal cannot be measured in antler points. Enough people voluntarily practice antler point restrictions. There is no need to mandate it. For those of you that wish to restrict my hunting for your own ego, please remember there are those that would like to restrict your hunting too. Kinda like the pot calling PETA black as I see it.
 
101 - 110 of 110 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top