At a meeting that lasted more than nine hours, Michigan鈥檚 Natural Resources Commission voted Wednesday to limit hunters in the Lower Peninsula to killing one antlered deer starting next year. Currently, hunters can kill up to two.
The policy is less restrictive than what the Michigan Department of Natural Resources had , which regulates hunting and fishing in the state.
Officials and some vocal hunters favored limiting sportsmen and sportswomen statewide to one antlered deer, a policy commonly known as the 鈥渙ne buck rule.鈥� Some thought the rule, which as a conservation tool, might finally pass.
Wednesday鈥檚 vote 鈥渏ust solidifies this was a waste of time,鈥� said Elliot Hubbard, one of the hunters who had promoted the one buck rule. 鈥淚t was a collaboration between hunters and the department to bring a sound biological regulation forward. It fell on deaf ears.鈥�
Prior to the vote, Dan Stewart, a Lower Peninsula resident and hunter, said he was opposed to the one buck rule, sometimes abbreviated as 鈥淥BR.鈥�
鈥淲hile I take a doe when populations allow, that isn鈥檛 what drives me into the woods. If OBR passes, my season could be over by the first week of November with one nice buck. Like many others, I would pack up and head out of the state to hunt somewhere else with my money,鈥� he said.
Public commenters spoke collectively for more than four hours at the day-long meeting. Some said that they wanted to hold onto the opportunity to kill two bucks while hunters like Hubbard lobbied for one buck to help balance the sex ratio of Michigan鈥檚 herd.
The state鈥檚 doe-to-buck ratio is unknown, but DNR data shows hunters in the state prefer killing antlered deer. Some hunters say that impacts the size of the bucks left to hunt in the state because hunters kill off the bigger bucks.
killing does could help reduce the deer population in parts of the state where they are involved in a high number of vehicle collisions, eat farmers鈥� crops and spread disease.
But critics of the one buck policy were quick to point out that only a limited number of deer hunted over the past decade 鈥� roughly 4% to 7% 鈥� represented a second antlered deer killed by one hunter. Some opponents also argued the DNR鈥檚 recommended policy was crafted to encourage hunters to kill more antlerless deer without guaranteeing that would happen.
In the Lower Peninsula, the DNR鈥檚 recommended policy would have eliminated a hunter鈥檚 ability to take an antlered deer with a single deer license. If a hunter wanted to kill an antlered deer, they would have needed to buy a combination license with which they would have been able to take an antlered deer or an antlerless deer in combination with a second antlerless deer.
鈥淏y coupling some of the licenses in the combo license, we could effectively be doubling the price of a buck license and stepping into the arena that is legislative authority,鈥� NRC Chairperson Becky Humphries explained to the crowd before voting began.
Ultimately, she said that was why she could not support the recommended one buck policy, because the Legislature, not the NRC, has the authority to raise license fees.
The was introduced by Commissioner David Nyberg, who said it was conceived as a compromise with other commissioners, but he wanted to protect the current combination license in the Upper Peninsula, where he lives and hunts.
鈥淭he Upper Peninsula, and even portions within the Upper Peninsula, are very different from each other, from the Lower Peninsula, in terms of habitat, food source, deer density, winter severity, predators,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd so I understand a lot of the concern that I heard from hunters about the proposed statewide one buck rule.鈥�
George Lindquist, the vice chair of the DNR鈥檚 West UP Citizens Advisory Council, said he was 鈥減retty darn happy鈥� Nyberg鈥檚 proposal passed. He didn鈥檛 like how the DNR鈥檚 recommended policy would have swapped out an antlered deer for an antlerless deer in the UP鈥檚 combination license.
鈥淭he groups and the people I鈥檓 involved with are happy that we鈥檙e keeping these rules the way they are up in the UP,鈥� said Lindquist. 鈥淲e just don鈥檛 have the numbers to allow for an increased antlerless take.鈥�
One commissioner was concerned the new regulations would entice hunters who normally kill two antlered deer in the Lower Peninsula to head to the UP so they could kill a second antlered deer, potentially adding additional strain onto a fragile herd. But Lindquist said he wasn鈥檛 worried because those hunters would have a hard time finding bucks with big enough antlers to legally shoot.
Wording for Nyberg鈥檚 amendment, and several other amendments commissioners voted on, were not made public in the days leading up to the meeting. Many pro one buck hunters felt blindsided when Nyberg鈥檚 amendment was presented. One public commenter suggested commissioners were like contestants on the TV show 鈥淪urvivor,鈥� saying one thing to constituents鈥� faces while planning to vote a different way.
Advocates for one buck seemed particularly surprised when a pilot program to 鈥渆arn a second buck,鈥� allowing hunters to kill an antlerless deer in the southern Lower Peninsula in order to kill a second antlered deer, was presented.
鈥淚 was tempted to make a comment on this during the meeting, but I didn鈥檛, I chose not to, because I didn鈥檛 want it to be perceived as argumentative,鈥� Nyberg told Bridge Michigan after the vote. 鈥淲hat we heard from testimony today from a lot of hunters was, I think, a perception that the NRC today planned to implement a second buck in lower Michigan. That was not the case.鈥�
Nyberg鈥檚 approved amendment included a request for the DNR to put forth 鈥渁 framework鈥� for the 鈥渆arn a second buck鈥� pilot project to be presented at the NRC鈥檚 July meeting.
Commissioner John Walters expressed concerns that there would be issues with 鈥済host does,鈥� hunters saying they killed an antlerless deer when they hadn鈥檛, in order to kill a second buck.
DNR officials said they did not yet know how they would police that program and their ability to do so would depend on how much money the department is budgeted by the Legislature.
Nyberg told Bridge the public would be able to weigh in on the earn-a-second-buck pilot before the commission voted on it in the coming months.
The NRC also passed demanding measurable scientific goals for deer policies recommended by the DNR, plus a handful of other regulations, including getting rid of certain firearm restrictions in the southern Lower Peninsula and eliminating the extended late antlerless deer season that had taken place after Jan. 1.
Other than the resolution, the commission passed these new rules as amendments to , which included several other regulations recommended by the DNR. The final version of the amended order was not available online as of Wednesday evening.
___
This story was originally published by and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
