• Since the 1970s, hunters have been allowed to kill more than one antlered deer
• Advocates have tried since the 1990s to limit hunters to one buck but were told it wasn’t possible without a legislation change
• Officials now say a legislation change isn’t necessary and the state’s hunting and fishing regulator is expected to vote on a one buck policy this week

---

Elliot Hubbard and his wife own a small hobby farm in Michigan’s Thumb region where Hubbard said “it’s not uncommon to see 30 to 40 does in our fields and a handful of bucks.”

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources doesn’t know the ratio of does to bucks in the state’s white-tailed deer herd, but officials suspect females outnumber males. 

Many people believe that’s because Michigan hunters prefer to kill bucks because state policy told them to do so for decades. As a result, the state’s herd is likely unbalanced, which some worry hurts the population and the quality of hunting because it means fewer big bucks left to target. 

To try to reverse that trend, advocates have since the 1990s tried to get state regulators to limit hunters to one buck per huntingseason, but had been told it was nearly impossible because of state legislation. Countless hours of research and advocacy proved fruitless for years, even as someother states with one buck rules saw more balanced kills and balanced herds.

This year, however, the DNR reversed course and recommended the Michigan Natural Resources commission enact a one buck rule that also puts doe tags at the forefront.

A vote could happen as soon as Wednesday, which some hunters feel would be historic for the state. 

In reality, today’s issues with the herd likely exist because a version of the rule first passed about 100 years ago.

‘They didn’t want to harvest any does’

After logging, development, fires and a period of unregulated commercial venison sales took its toll on Michigan’s deer herd, the state passed a law in 1921 requiring hunters to kill just one deer — and it had to be a buck.

“It is expected this provision will re-populate the forest of Michigan with deer,” an article published in the St. Joseph Herald-Press said at the time.

“They didn’t want to harvest any does because, in their mind, does make the babies,” explained Baraga County hunter Jordan Hoover, who grew up with a father involved in deer conservation. “So, if we don’t take any does, we’ll have more deer.” 

In practice, the “one buck only” policy appears to have not only helped the deer population grow in Michigan but also affected sex ratios and the psyche of hunters.

By the 1930s, Michigan reported 2.4 does for every buck statewide, though many hunters believed the imbalance was even greater. In the 1940s, the state began holding antlerless deer seasons to control growing deer populations that were damaging farms. By 1965, hunters could use an archery license to take a deer of either sex, though many hunters still sought that trophy buck.

“As the herd grew, the mentality didn’t evolve with the changes of the environment and the population as a whole,” said Todd Johnson, the director of policy and advocacy for the state council of the National Deer Association in Michigan.

Buck was still king. In fact, starting in 1977, hunters could shoot two bucks in one year if they took one with a firearm and another with a bow. Then the bag limit doubled to four in 1986. 

Some hunters started to feel that encouraging antlerless deer harvests and limiting hunters to one buck could increase the health of the herd and grow the number of big bucks in the future by letting more young bucks mature. 

In 1998, the combination license was created and hunters were limited to two buck tags.

“Conscientious hunters everywhere rejoiced,” read an article in the Lansing State Journal published that year.

‘The countless phone calls’

Hoover, the Baraga County hunter, said it was around that time when his father, David Hoover, “started standing on the gas pedal” in lobbying for a one buck rule.

The younger Hoover recalled his dad driving back and forth between their home in Calumet and Lansing. 

“And just the hundreds if not thousands of hours that I saw him put into studies, sitting at his desk, the countless phone calls, the emails, pouring over all the data,” he said. “It made a big impression on me.”

By the early 2000s, the idea of a one buck rule seemed at a fever pitch. In 2005, one sportswriter opened a story this way: “State wildlife officials say they’re hearing a mantra about deer hunting across the state: one buck, one buck, one buck.” 

But the DNR said that a one buck rule couldn’t be implemented without new legislation. Officials also worried a one buck rule would likely result in the loss of more than $5 million for the department because second buck tags could not be purchased. 

In 2007, the Natural Resources Commission looked at two proposals for a one buck rule, but both were unanimously opposed, with commissioners citing preliminarysurveys showing “a strong majority of hunters” were not interested in being limited to one buck.

‘An overdue correction’

Today’s hunters are divided. In 2020, a DNR survey found nearly half of them — 48% — would support limiting the combination license to allow for only one antlered deer to be killed.

Meanwhile, a highly vocal contingent has emerged to push the one buck rule. They swap studies in Facebook groups, talk on podcasts and are involved in advisory groups created by the DNR.

They point to other Midwestern states, such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, that have had a one buck rule for more than a hundred years and have more balanced hunts.

In 2025, Ohio hunters reported killing 1.42 antlerless deer for every antlered deer. In Pennsylvania, hunters reported killing 1.73 antlerless deer for every antlered deer. In Michigan, hunters reported killing 0.92 antlerless deer for every one antlered deer.

“In this state, we’re buck-centric in the fact that people just want to shoot their buck,” said Lincoln Rohn, a hunter based in Comstock Park. “A lot of them don’t care how big it is, and they want to shoot two of them.”

Rohn, Hoover, Hubbard, Hubbard’s wife, Rashel, and others had been pushing for the one buck rule but running into similar obstacles as past advocates.

“We’ve always been told that we could not do one buck,” said Rohn. “We were told, because the Legislature needed a combination license, that we could not do it. It had to be two bucks.”

But the advocates noted the law called for a combination license allowing for two deer, but didn’t say two bucks. At their urging, the DNR asked for a legal review and determined the advocates were right. That allowed the department to support a one buck rule. 

“This change is an overdue correction due to the evolution of the deer herd in Michigan,” Johnson, of the National Deer Association Michigan, said. “We’re at a point where we need to manage the herd for sustainable health.”

Thank you to our Bridge Michigan Outdoors sponsors

Bridge Michigan Outdoors is made possible by generous financial support from our sponsors. Sponsorship supports our independent journalism mission but does not constitute sponsor endorsement of individual articles or editorial content. Bridge Michigan journalism remains fact- and data-driven and independent at all times.

Please visit the About page for more information and to subscribe to Bridge Michigan Outdoors. Interested in becoming a sponsor? Contact Emma Carr.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under our Republication Guidelines. Questions? Email republishing@bridgemi.com