Michigan-Antler Point Restrictions Pass

[Mojostick]

This is great news for northern Michigan. I work at Cabela's and I have yet to talk to one customer that isn't for this change and virtually everyone mentions they wish it was statewide. Times are a changin'!


Antler Point Restrictions in Michigan’s Northwest Lower Peninsula Approved by NRC

Deer hunters in 12 northwest Lower Peninsula counties will have to count antler points before they shoot a buck this fall, as the Natural Resources Commission enacted antler point restrictions (APRs) at its June 13 meeting in Lansing.

The regulation requires hunters to ensure antlered deer have at least one antler with a minimum of three points, with each point at least 1 inch long. A similar rule has been in effect in Leelanau County the last ten seasons.

The NRC approved the regulation under a process initiated after the Northwest Michigan branch of the Quality Deer Management Association proposed the rule more than a year ago. The process requires a DNR survey of deer hunters in the proposed area, which in this case found that 69 percent of hunters approved of the regulation.

Under the process, proposed APRs must protect at least 50 percent of the yearling bucks. This ensures that restrictions can have a meaningful impact on the number of bucks likely to survive their first hunting season, leading to a herd with more, older bucks in it.

The counties added under this restriction include Antrim, Benzie, Charlevoix, Emmet, Grand Traverse, Kalkaska, Lake, Manistee, Mason, Missaukee, Osceola and Wexford. Throughout Michigan, all hunters that harvest two antlered deer must ensure at least one has four or more antler points on one side, and this requirement will remain in place within these counties.

In addition, a group known as the Lower Peninsula Deer Management Initiative (LPDMI) has submitted two different APR proposals to be considered for implementation starting with the 2014 deer season. Informational meetings are being held at a number of locations in June and July. More information can be found on the DNR website at  www.michigan.gov/dnr.

[Mojostick]

More news on the new rules.

 http://www.outdoornews.com/July-2013-1/APR-OKd-for-part-of-LP/

APR OK’d for part of L.P.
By Howard Meyerson Contributing Writer
Posted on July 4, 2013


Lansing — Deer hunters planning to hunt bucks in northwest Lower Michigan this fall will need to look closely before they pull the trigger. A new mandatory antler point restriction was approved by the Natural Resources Commission in June for 12 counties in the northwest Lower Peninsula.

Hunters will be allowed to shoot only bucks with at least three or more 1-inch points on  one antler. The rules specify that the first buck has to have three points or more on a side. An antler on a second buck has to have four points or more.

The new rules affect Antrim, Benzie, Charlevoix, Emmet, Grand Traverse, Kalkaska, Lake, Manistee, Mason, Missaukee, Osceola, and Wexford counties. They go into effect this fall and stay in place for five years. Leelanau County, also in the region, already has antler point restrictions, for a total of 13 counties.

“It pretty much covers the entire northwest region of Zone 2. We were very pleased with the final decision,” said Ryan Ratajczak, president of the northwest Michigan branch of the Quality Deer Management Association. “The data we collected indicated that seven out of 10 hunters (surveyed) want the regulations. We’re glad the NRC supported the process and followed through with approving it.”

Getting approval for antler point restrictions is a lengthy process. DNR wildlife staffers first survey citizens in the proposed area to gauge approval for the change. At least 50 percent of the people contacted have to respond to the survey, then 66 percent of the hunters who respond must approve of it. The proposal is then brought to the Natural Resources Commission.

Ratajczak’s organization began pushing for the change in 2011, first attempting to get APRs in Benzie and Grand Traverse counties. Both are adjacent to Leelanau County, which already has the restrictions.

State wildlife officials at that time were developing a regional deer management plan. The initial APR proposal didn’t fit into that scheme, Ratajczak said.

“It made more sense to look at a bigger area,” he said. “So we really had to expand our resources, but in the end it worked out pretty well.”

The DNR mail survey of 2,000 hunters generated an 80-percent response rate, and 69 percent of the hunters who responded  approved of the regulations, according to state wildlife officials.

“People come out all over the place (on these proposals),” said Brent Rudolph,” the DNR’s deer  and elk program leader. “Some say they oppose point restrictions, that they are not sure it’s worth it. Some say: ‘Where I hunt, I don’t think I’ll see deer that meet the criteria.’

“Some of the folks in favor of this have said it’s an expansion of the Leelanau County restriction, and that is kind of true,” Rudolph said. “Leelanau has had it for 10 years. I assume (in this case) they have seen or heard of positive results (in Leelanau County).”

Ratajczak said harvest data from Leelanau County show hunters are killing as many bucks as they did before antler restrictions were implemented and that “the bucks are bigger.” The number of hunters who hunt there has not declined, suggesting that antler point restrictions do not drive hunters away.

Michigan has five other deer management units where antler point restrictions exist. Those include DMU 117 on Drummond Island, DMU 122 at Norway in the western Upper Peninsula, DMU 245 on South Fox Island, DMU 145 in Iosco County, and DMI 115 on Beaver Island.

Rudolph said APR has not dramatically changed deer populations. Proponents of APR have argued that not shooting younger bucks and shooting older, more developed deer creates populations with larger, older, more developed deer.

“We have seen all sorts of conclusions and ideas after restrictions are put in place, but some of those are flawed in their reasoning. We haven’t seen dramatic changes and have no evidence of it,” Rudolph said. “But it (antler restrictions) is not something we see as a concern, so we let it play out.

“With these 12 counties, we’ll be in a position to have better data afterwards.”

[last arrow]

Thanks for posting.  I expect a year of limited opportunities for a legal buck where I hunt with better opportunities in the future.  It should be interesting to see if anything changes.

[killinstuff]

One of the best things the DNR has come up with IMO. I've shot my fair share of spikes and forks up here cause that's what was out there for the most part. I hunt a lot and see only one or two decent (Northern MI standards) bucks a year so this will be a nice change for a better future.

[degabe]

Got to have them bigger horns cause they make better soup.

[abbatoys]

Good move and should take only a couple years to see the results. I don't hunt those counties, but hope it produces some nice deer. I do hunt  northern Oceana and northern Newaygo counties and I do know the bucks have become fewer and fewer the last couple years.

[MERGANZER]

Hopefully the LPDMI is passed as well for the 2014 season.  It should help out the age class of the bucks and save most yearlings for one more year of development.

Ganzer

[PEARL DRUMS]

I'm indifferent I suppose. I feel it only emphasizes antler size and not memories or opportunities for hunters. If inches are your thing, then I guess it would be welcome. My challenge is my chosen primitive gear and not antler size. I've never enjoyed bow hunting more until I gave up on the "trophy" quest and started challenging myself in other ways. I have 2 glass killed older deer on my wall and neither hold a candle to the two smaller primitive bucks I got the last few years, not even close. That's my two cents from Central Michigan.

[Mojostick]

3pt APR has nothing to do with trophy hunting. A 90-100 class, 2 year old 6pt-7pt is hardly what most would call a "trophy class" buck.

[PEARL DRUMS]

Depends on what you hunt with and what your hunting means to you. Shoot a deer with a wooden bow you made and cane arrows you made with stone points you made and class,inches and points means ZERO.

I guess my point is we don't all hunt for the same reasons, we don't all hunt the same way and we don't all want the same thing from our experiences.

[Mojostick]

The reality is, in a state with 650,000 deer hunters and 1,500,000 plus deer, it's difficult to manage a billion dollar ag/tourist interest for the very, very few hunters who handicap themselves to the point where they use stone points or a flintlock blunderbuss.

On top of it, with our very liberal buck tag system, Michigan kills more yearling bucks than any other state. Our deer herd has been skewed to having an imbalanced age structure for so long that two entire generations of deer hunters thinks it's normal.

What many deer hunters fail to realize is, state DNR's aren't there to be the department of hunter satisfaction. DNR's have the task of managing large deer herds for their impact on agriculture, deer/auto accidents, disease, forest overbrowsing, deer herd health, deer herd impacts on other species, etc.

Hunters are allowed the priviledge to participate in a hunting season and follow the rules set forth. One can always choose not to hunt.

Given the widely available antlerless permits in Michigan, over 500,000 again, a hunter can choose to go to where the most permits are allowed and shoot a couple deer a day. In addition, any bowhunter can always choose to take a doe with a bow. There's no reason to go "bucks only" with a bow, when archery tags are always "either sex".

I often hunt with a wooden Owl bow, made by Ed Scott. I own several of them and boxes full of wooden arrows. I, and some 70% of surveyed hunters, see nothing wrong with a 5 year trial period to test some new regulations. If, in 5 years, a super-majority of 66% plus doesn't like the 3pt rule, we can look at other regulations to balance the deer herd. My guess is, within 3-4 years, the new rule will be so popular that the hunters in places left out and excluded from the new 3pt rule will demand to be included in the new rule. We shall see.

[PEARL DRUMS]

I don't consider my chose of weapons a handicap, you may however. My bow hunting is very personal to me and means so much more than any regulations or antler sizes could ever change. I could care the less what age the  critters are, within reason, I don't care about other states and their deer age class, bigger bucks wont make my hunting experiences any better for me simply because of the reasons I hunt to begin with. Im not trying to argue, that's silly. Im simply stating my opinion on antler size. I realize Im a super small minority with my chosen weapon. I live and hunt in an area where 3 points on one side would be fruitless, 60% (guess)have that thier first year.

[Mojostick]

Right! A DNR can't manage to make every hunter happy, by whatever subjective "happy scale" they may use. What a DNR can do, and is charged with doing, is try to manage an enormous deer herd for the 9,000,000 residents of the state and for future generations.

As the dynamics change, rules and management must change with them. In the 1920's, the 3" spike APR rule was set as a way to grow deer herds, after market hunting and settlers basically wiped out the deer herds. I think it's safe to say that deer herds are not near extinction today. The 3" rule wasn't set to make hunters happy, it was meant solely to grow herd numbers and to limit antlerless kill. The 3" APR was also unpopular with many, at the time it was set in the 1920's.

[PEARL DRUMS]

Im not against it, and Im not for it. I will do whatever the law says I can and keep enjoying my 45 bow hunts a year. For the record, Im a DNR lover and will rarely bad mouth their decisions. Again, Im the minority!

[Mojostick]

The DNR has a near impossible task. They will never make everyone happy.

Not only that, Michigan deer habitat is very diverse. The northern UP may as well be Canada. When settlers came, there were still woodland caribou in the UP. Yet, southern Michigan may as well be Ohio or Illinois, with rich farmland. Making statewide rules is very difficult.

The gun only hunters think bowhunters ruin their hunt, some think the youth hunt in September ruins rifle hunting in November, farmers claim hunters won't kill enough deer, hunters "up north" claim hunters kill too many deer, hunters that don't want any buck rules want the freedom to shoot whatever antlered buck they see, while others want to see more 2 year old plus bucks in the woods.
Then you have those who want to hunt over bait and then those who claim bait alters natural deer movements and makes deer nocturnal. You have those who claim archery season is too long, yet others claim neighboring states have bow seasons that are nearly 2 months longer. You have those who claim muzzleloader season is too long and should be no inlines allowed, yet 95% of ML hunters hunters already own inlines.

Then you have 100,000 reported deer/auto accidents a year in Michigan. That's only those that are reported. Don't forget bovine TB and the cattle and dairy industry or CWD.

In a way, we're lucky deer hunting rules are as lax as they are.

[PEARL DRUMS]

Near impossible task is a great descriptive. That's why I respect all they do, or don't do. You forgot to mention they are severely under staffed due to massive budget cuts. There are areas around me that have 1 officer covering 3 counties, of which are some the most heavily hunted in our state. I aspired to be an officer when I was a young man, maybe its a good thing I didn't persue it harder.

[J.T.]

The way I see it Michigan has a very vocal group of horn chasers who are more concerned with what buck there neighbor shot than with enjoying nature.  These people turn me off when I hear them complain about what a buck would have been next year.  He might have been bigger next year but if the hunter is happy putting his tag on him then great.  I hunt for my own reasons I've killed quite a few large antlered Michigan bucks and a buch of small ones and I cherish the memory of every one of them .  If someone enjoys hunting horns that's fine but I'm sick of hearing people complain about what someone else shot just congratulate them and move on.  Our DNR manages money not our deer heard it makes no sense that in many units on a private 40 you can get many doe permits but there's no permits on the public piece next door same deer but different rules.

[Mojostick]

JT,
You do know that any public land hunter can kill 2 antlerless deer with a bow, anywhere in the state, right? That's on public land too. So any public land bowhunter can kill 2 antlerless deer with a bow, anywhere, in the UP, NWLP, wherever, if he buys the combo tag.

The vocal group is the majority. The super-majority actually, as set forth by NRC/DNR rules. The last 3 surveys showed that 83% of Beaver Islanders wanted a 3pt APR, 72% of Leenanau hunters wanted to continue 3pt APR and 69% of NWLP hunters want to try 3pt APR for 5 years.
It also appears that Drummond Island hunters want in on a 3pt APR rule.

[PEARL DRUMS]

The hard part is accepting that the majority can take away already satisfying experiences from the minority. Such is the democracy we love.

[Mojostick]

Hunting and fishing rules aren't a democracy. The surveys are only taken to get a finger on the pulse of the masses, to determine if the majority will accept a rule or not. They surveys themselves have no "power", except to show the NRC what most hunters want out of policy, as long as it doesn't hurt the resource.
The surveys were nothing more than a survey of hunter attitudes on a potential rule change.

Ultimately, the NRC decides most everything about deer rules, unless the legislature moves first.

For example, look at the failed bait ban a few years back. Even though a near decade long policy was in place that if CWD was found then baiting would be banned, it was never accepted by the majority of hunters and the majority continued to bait after CWD was found the ban and eventually the ban was repealed. The truth was, the majority of hunters had no desire to try to hunt without bait and they ignored the rule.

Also look at antlerless quota's. They never go up due to hunter demand, but they often go down after hunter protest. This year, antlerless quota's were reduced in most places, even though the DNR would have prefered they remain higher.

Yet another change was making crossbows legal. The truth is, despite what many of us traditional bowhunters want to hear is, the majority of Michigan hunters wanted crossbows to be legal and so they are now.

Personally, I'd like the satisfying experience to bow hunt in September and January like our brothers in Ohio do. Unfortunately, it's fellow Michigan hunters, typically firearms only hunters, that claim our bow season is already too long, even though ourbow season is among the shortest in the region.