Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

NR antlerless tags

M

Muskrat24

Well-Known Member
I may have misread a post under the legislation discussions but NR still get an antlerless permit when they draw a statewide tag in any season correct? Why don’t we push to eliminate the automatic antlerless tag given the current herd/population issue? I don’t have the numbers of NR antlerless tags filled but I know of three out of three muzzy hunters that filled theirs across fence from one of my farms. Resource based change
 
Last edited:
NRs are required to buy an antlerless tag when they draw an any sex tag. Another dnr revenue maker. Is it huge in the big scheme of things, probably not. But it’s expensive compared to other states driving the overall cost to $660, when a person draws, adding up to the most expensive whitetail tag in the country.
 
Muskrat24 said:
I may have misread a post under the legislation discussions but NR still get an antlerless permit when they draw a statewide tag in any season correct? Why don’t we push to eliminate the automatic antlerless tag given the current herd/population issue? I don’t have the numbers of NR antlerless tags filled but I know of three out of three muzzy hunters that filled theirs across fence from one of my farms. Resource based change
Click to expand...
Great ? & it’s a complex one….
1) about 90-95% of NR’s don’t fill doe tags so- in reality it’s not hurting anything.
2) it WAS something like “97 or 98%” didn’t fill doe tags before this change where the doe tag got added.
3) this was FARM BUREAU’S lobbying request/input & likely why it got done this way. I’d bet my life FB is the sole reason it’s in place to be honest…. Not 100% sure but I’m 99.9% sure.
Those are the facts or “best guess” trying to explain this.
Now, “what to change”?!?!? In my STRONG OPINION…. You don’t push & create a battle with FB to get the antlerless tag removed from NR draw… it’s not usually used and it does bring in a little $. If u fight em on that- you just spent POLITICAL CAPITAL!!! The far better fight, IMO- FIGHT for “END SHED BUCK SEASON”!!!!! + “LOWER DOE QUOTAS IN STRUGGLING COUNTIES!!!” That’s gonna take a huge amount of political capital - need full court Press on that and we MUST WIN ON THOSE 2 THINGS!!!!!!! Those 2 things will bring the real change!!!!!!
 
Sligh1 said:
Great ? & it’s a complex one….
1) about 90-95% of NR’s don’t fill doe tags so- in reality it’s not hurting anything.
2) it WAS something like “97 or 98%” didn’t fill doe tags before this change where the doe tag got added.
3) this was FARM BUREAU’S lobbying request/input & likely why it got done this way. I’d bet my life FB is the sole reason it’s in place to be honest…. Not 100% sure but I’m 99.9% sure.
Those are the facts or “best guess” trying to explain this.
Now, “what to change”?!?!? In my STRONG OPINION…. You don’t push & create a battle with FB to get the antlerless tag removed from NR draw… it’s not usually used and it does bring in a little $. If u fight em on that- you just spent POLITICAL CAPITAL!!! The far better fight, IMO- FIGHT for “END SHED BUCK SEASON”!!!!! + “LOWER DOE QUOTAS IN STRUGGLING COUNTIES!!!” That’s gonna take a huge amount of political capital - need full court Press on that and we MUST WIN ON THOSE 2 THINGS!!!!!!! Those 2 things will bring the real change!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Good information and thanks for the insight. I do like the answer tho because it is similar to my argument on the 2-5 acres going to 40 acres. Is that argument worth the political capital and to tick off some residents to save an approximately 1200 bucks at most and for a moral victory. To me no. Good to know about the NR not filling doe tags and for sure not worth the fight. The two items you mentioned should garner more attention and political capital than chasing the LOT acreage change as the shed buck season and antlerless quota changes will help the resource much more IMO.
 
For $660 you get 1 buck and 1 doe tag , not exactly a bargain ! I hope they don’t try to push to end it . They’ve cut enough from Nonresidents!
 
Muskrat24 said:
Good information and thanks for the insight. I do like the answer tho because it is similar to my argument on the 2-5 acres going to 40 acres. Is that argument worth the political capital and to tick off some residents to save an approximately 1200 bucks at most and for a moral victory. To me no. Good to know about the NR not filling doe tags and for sure not worth the fight. The two items you mentioned should garner more attention and political capital than chasing the LOT acreage change as the shed buck season and antlerless quota changes will help the resource much more IMO.
Click to expand...
Good thoughts. I’d add to the 40 acre bill…. A lot of this was political capital and motivations from a lot of groups. Dnr with things I listed: complaints, investigations & abuses of it. The biological merits of it.
Legislators …. I’m getting pummeled by folks who can’t even get land to hunt on, public is crowded & they can’t even get 1 buck…. There’s folks with small parcels that want 3 bucks? Stuff like that. & some sharper legislators who understand strategy…. Guys - we were getting hammered on 3 bucks by every group that wanted “special tags”…. Outfitters, NR’s, whatever….. “u fighting us for our one small request of 1 buck tag when some guys get 3?!!?” They made a dang good case and they beat that point over & over. Some legislators wanted that point addressed.
This is a “broad coalition” type bill…. Whether it passes or not- a huge variety of folks wanted it for a variety of reasons.
 
Sligh1 said:
Good thoughts. I’d add to the 40 acre bill…. A lot of this was political capital and motivations from a lot of groups. Dnr with things I listed: complaints, investigations & abuses of it. The biological merits of it.
Legislators …. I’m getting pummeled by folks who can’t even get land to hunt on, public is crowded & they can’t even get 1 buck…. There’s folks with small parcels that want 3 bucks? Stuff like that. & some sharper legislators who understand strategy…. Guys - we were getting hammered on 3 bucks by every group that wanted “special tags”…. Outfitters, NR’s, whatever….. “u fighting us for our one small request of 1 buck tag when some guys get 3?!!?” They made a dang good case and they beat that point over & over. Some legislators wanted that point addressed.
This is a “broad coalition” type bill…. Whether it passes or not- a huge variety of folks wanted it for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...
I don’t think any of us doubt what you’re saying here and as has been said many times before, your time and effort is appreciated. I also believe that the “fighting us for our one small request” would be muted if it was an across the board cut and not singling out a select few. We all want the same end results and that is a healthy, sustainable population. I fully understand the give a little/take a little concept after 8 yrs in city govt. We can’t and won’t win them all. We can give them accurate facts and hope it changes their thinking some.

Here are a couple:
21/22 season #’s- 9150 NR antlerless tags issued- 2275 reported kills- 25% success
22/23 season #’s- 9096 NR antlerless tags issued- 2389 reported kills- 26% success
They are actually a little more successful than assumed so maybe it is worth considering. Out of curiosity, where are we seeing that only 5-10% are used?
Maybe a small concern and I’m curious how it was handled but there were 329 antlered deer reported on antlerless tags. I assume they were confiscated and fines written but Idk. I hope it’s not just overlooked.
 
Last edited:
I think the lower doe population is temporary. I chose to not fill my doe tag this year , but also had sits with 20+ deer sightings . I spun around a couple sections one evening and saw over 100 deer.

If they eliminated the doe tag, a NR landowner would never be able to shoot a doe off his farm .. I have over 300 acres, that’d be one of the more odd management rules I’ve heard in any state .

It depends on location, some areas are low on deer numbers, but I don’t think it warrants a battle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom