Michigan-Sportsman.com banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 97 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Not looking for arguments ,, I’m a firm believer of shoot what makes you happy. I just feel this topic could be managed better. Lots of drama over baiting and now a new bill to possibly change the start date of the gun opener...whew, exhausting..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
I’m a firm believer of shoot what makes you happy. I just feel this topic could be managed better.
If that were the case why did you inferred or promote OBR? Last I checked you can still buy one buck tag. Why would you restrict and drive hunter attrition by discouraging more days hunting afield and loss of economic revenue?

What reason is there to make it mandatory, or why would you want one buck rule?

Keep in mind 56% of Michigan hunters buy or purchase combo licenses. Only 17% bought one tag licenses. Which is even fewer than those buying antlerless tags of 26%

Also noteworthy is the fact only 6% actually ended up harvesting two antlered bucks? I see no reason to limit when not only the majority of hunters want the combo tag but more importantly the resources is not affected negatively by it.

This is from the 2017 harvest report attached. The 6% can be found in the opening abstract paragraph, 7th sentence. The amount of licenses sold 620'932, and the breakdown of 17% single tag, 26% antlerless tags, and 56% combo tags can be found on page 16, figure 6.

So again, "What reason is there to make it mandatory, or why would you want one buck rule?" It shows it has no significant harvest or reduction of antlered bucks, but is the majority of license revenue.

Just can not understand why anyone especially if they are "a firm believer of shoot what makes you happy", would want to promote or infer restricting someone else, from doing that?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
If that were the case why did you inferred or promote OBR? Last I checked you can still buy one buck tag. Why would you restrict and drive hunter attrition by discouraging more days hunting afield and loss of economic revenue?

What reason is there to make it mandatory, or why would you want one buck rule?

Keep in mind 56% of Michigan hunters buy or purchase combo licenses. Only 17% bought one tag licenses. Which is even fewer than those buying antlerless tags of 26%

Also noteworthy is the fact only 6% actually ended up harvesting two antlered bucks? I see no reason to limit when not only the majority of hunters want the combo tag but more importantly the resources is not affected negatively by it.

This is from the 2017 harvest report attached. The 6% can be found in the opening abstract paragraph, 7th sentence. The amount of licenses sold 620'932, and the breakdown of 17% single tag, 26% antlerless tags, and 56% combo tags can be found on page 16, figure 6.

So again, "What reason is there to make it mandatory, or why would you want one buck rule?" It shows it has no significant harvest or reduction of antlered bucks, but is the majority of license revenue.

Just can not understand why anyone especially if they are "a firm believer of shoot what makes you happy", would want to promote or infer restricting someone else, from doing that?
Wasn’t looking to debate the issue, it was a simple question, Will Michigan ever become a one buck state.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,478 Posts
I support a voluntary one buck rule. If you only want to shoot one buck I think you should be able to. I never shoot more than one buck myself. But it's my choice and I'm happy with it.

But you have to remember why they started multiple bucks. The idea was to give more accomplished hunters a chance at a second buck. Because quite a few hunters were striking out. So, from a herd reduction standpoint it makes sense to allow hunters to shoot two bucks. In certain areas we have APR's to keep the younger bucks from being taken out. I think this works very well.

Good luck everyone!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,237 Posts
I don't believe so. The state's not going to turn down the amount of extra $$$ the combo tag provides imo. & On a personal note; If it had been in place this year, I'm not sure I would have made the decision to shoot the small 6 point that walked by me in mid October. He was using his knee as his foot & kept falling down. I knew it was the right thing to do & I didn't think twice about doing it. Now I'd like to sit here & tell you that I would have still took that shot & ended his suffering, but if it was the only buck tag I had for the year, & I had proof of a couple stud bucks in my area like I did this year, I honestly don't know if I would have. Would've been in a lose lose situation, mad at myself for not doing the right ethical thing, or pissed that I was done buck hunting with 2 of the biggest bucks in my area that I had ever hunted. Thankfully I had the combo. I realize that this is probably not common & I might not have to do something like that again. But it did happen, just saying.
IMG_20191028_211401266.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,011 Posts
Wasn’t looking to debate the issue, it was a simple question, Will Michigan ever become a one buck state.
We were a 1 buck state until about '77. A number of us hunted under that rule. A lot more of us hunted under the 4 buck rule. My god, that was fun.
I would love to see a 3 buck rule all 4 on a side for those electing to buy that kind of combo tag.

L & O
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
I don't blame you at all for taking that deer but I had one on camera that was a 6pt when someone shot him in the front leg. We named him gimpy, he lost his antlers in november that first year and we never had a chance to kill him. Year 2 he was an 8pt inside the ears, year 3 he was a small 10pt maybe 110-120. The last pick I had of him was at age 4.5 and he was a main frame 10pt with a couple kickers, probably 130-150.
I don't believe so. The state's not going to turn down the amount of extra $$$ the combo tag provides imo. & On a personal note; If it had been in place this year, I'm not sure I would have made the decision to shoot the small 6 point that walked by me in mid October. He was using his knee as his foot & kept falling down. I knew it was the right thing to do & I didn't think twice about doing it. Now I'd like to sit here & tell you that I would have still took that shot & ended his suffering, but if it was the only buck tag I had for the year, & I had proof of a couple stud bucks in my area like I did this year, I honestly don't know if I would have. Would've been in a lose lose situation, mad at myself for not doing the right ethical thing, or pissed that I was done buck hunting with 2 of the biggest bucks in my area that I had ever hunted. Thankfully I had the combo. I realize that this is probably not common & I might not have to do something like that again. But it did happen, just saying.
View attachment 461147
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,306 Posts
I only purchased one buck tag for several years. November got boring when I tagged out. And an antlerless deer tag didnt motivate me to hunt much. I'm 99.9% certain I'll eat my second buck tag and I'm fine with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,511 Posts
To the original question... no we will never be a one buck state. The next big rule change will be MAPR's on both tags.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sparky23 and sniper
1 - 20 of 97 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top