Deer Hunting in Michigan, "Levels of Participation"

[daappleknocker]

Deer Hunting in Michigan: “Levels of Participation”

The current debate surrounding deer hunting in Michigan, is the practicability of mandatory regulation changes promoting antler size or taxidermy over the procurement of venison for the table. The simple answer to this question is for each hunter to ask themselves, “Why do I hunt?”, and the related question, “What is my level of participation?” Both of these questions are important to this discussion and must be answered by each hunter individually.

The first question, “Why do I hunt?” is unique to each individual hunter. Ask one hundred hunters that question and you will get one hundred different answers. A much easier question may be, “What is my level of participation in hunting?” This could easily be answered on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most avid and passionate hunters while the opening three day “social” hunters would be a one.

The tens, avid and passionate hunters, are often the hunters who start hunting on October 1st with their choice of archery equipment, and don’t stop until January 1st, weather permitting or maybe not permitting. They think about hunting 24/7, 365 days a year, 366 this year. They are more apt to join the Quality Deer Management Association and return MDNR generated surveys. I would classify their level of participation as extreme.

On the other hand we have the ones. They view their participation in hunting as a tradition, something they have always done with their buddies, a “social” event with harvesting a deer as a secondary motive. They enjoy time spent in the woods and any venison harvested is appreciated, and will harvest the first “legal” buck they encounter. Would they like to harvest a “wall hanger?” Absolutely, but they have very limited time to spend in the act of hunting.

In between the “ones” and “tens” we have every other level of participation. The question becomes, “should we manipulate harvest regulations to advantage one level of participation over another? The MDNR Wildlife Division in collusion with the NRC say yes. I disagree!

To do so would mean a drastic reduction of many of the lower levels of participation by hunters. We have already seen this happen. Anyone who follows the Annual Deer Harvest Survey Reports can definitely see the trend in hunter participation, and the antlered deer harvest statistics dropping. Deer populations are also declining at an alarming rate in many DMU’s, from the apparent overharvest of antlerless deer. In the Upper Peninsula, where the battle cry has been, “you want venison, shoot a doe” since 2008, when “hunter’s choice” was thrust on hunters it is especially dismal.

Hunters from many camps have left the U.P. because of hunter’s choice. My camp in NW Marquette County is a prime example. In 2005 we had seven hunters, ALL with combo tags. We let more young bucks pass than you can shake a stick at, voluntarily. Last year, we had five hunters in camp. Only one hunter purchased a license, the single license option, and he only spent one and a half days in the woods before giving up.

Mandatory antler point restrictions are a pipe dream. Even some members of the QDMA are starting to realize that by not spreading the harvest pressure on all age classes of bucks, there are fewer 2 ½ to 3 ½ deer that make it to the desirable older age classes. That was pointed out in the February/March issue of Field and Stream in an article entitled, “Our State of the Whitetail Union, Deer Downturn”. Michigan was down over 54% in Boone & Crockett and Pope & Young entries in 2014, with only 32 reported. This downturn has many trophy hunters silently worried about the effects of MAR’s.

I have recently conducted a survey of golf courses and bowling alleys to find out if they could survive on “league play” only. The majority could not with the remainder saying it would be very tough. As with deer hunting there are many levels of participation in golf and bowling. When you disenfranchise many of your less avid customers to cater to a higher level clientele, you will eventually close your doors. I hope the MDNR and the NRC do not continue this downward spiral of a disastrous agenda. They need to remember that they have a responsibility to, “Future generations".

A Concerned Wildlife Resource Advocate
Curtis Stone
3-21-16
[e-mail]