Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Jameson

regs changes '08/ no more "zone 4"

21 posts in this topic

It's "official"

Is there still a zone 4? Nope, it goes to Zone 2 this year. Where's my flame suit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really disagree witht the statement below ...whom ever wrote it really duped the MN Hunters, as I don't see any real input from MN hunters being taken into part of Zone 4 mangement. The DNR takes public notes but reports show how condescending the program is. Heck did they really talley the votes? All it showes is what the citizens supported and what they did not.

-----

“Given that the regulation would be largely social in nature, it would be difficult to pursue without majority support from deer hunters. We will continue to look at different ways of managing deer populations that incorporate biological and social aspects of deer management.”

And then this report is from early March Outdoor News.

At Monday's meeting, hunters expressed a variety of concerns about the proposal, including how it would affect deer populations; whether or not it would create crowding issues on the opening day of the season; and how antlerless permits would be allocated, said Ken Varland, DNR southern region wildlife manager at New Ulm.

Most of the people who spoke at the meeting were opposed to the proposal, and agency officials also handed out a questionnaire at Monday's meeting.

The results haven't been tallied, but “just a quick look indicates there was moderate support, but there were negative comments, too; people who don't support it,” Varland said.

While a citizens committee advanced the simplification proposal, the DNR says a nine-day season in Zone 4 won't hurt deer populations.

“I think people have a hard time believing that,” Varland said.

Since 2003, 15 permit areas have been moved from Zone 4 to Zone 2. That's been accompanied by a 2-percent decrease in total harvest and a 6-percent decrease in buck harvest, according to Marrett Grund, deer researcher for the DNR in Madelia.

Additional, officials say Zone 4 “functionally doesn't exist” because all-season, multi-zone buck, and youth antlerless licenses have allowed many hunters to hunt both seasons. The simplification proposal would create a continuous nine-day season in Zone 4, rather than two weekends and two opening days.

“The addition of three weekdays does not influence deer harvest and may spread it out and create a more ‘relaxed' hunt,” according to Grund's presentation at the meeting.

The reaction to the proposal to eliminate the all-season license and instead allow hunters to buy three stand-alone licenses (firearms, muzzleloader, and archery) was a “mixed bag,” Varland said, but when hunters realized that buying all three would be the same cost as an all-season license - and they would save money by buying only two of them - they tended to be supportive.

House hearings

At the same time as it's taking public input on the proposals, the DNR also is presenting the package to lawmakers, since many of the ideas would need legislative approval.

The agency presented it to the Senate and the House. The plan is to implement the changes as soon as this fall.

“It's not pre-empting the public part; it's just that it all has to be done at once,” Cornicelli said.

Sounds pre-emptive to me. Did the reports hinder the legeslation and house ruling?

Did the DNR just happen to leave some of the facts out of the submitted propolsels? I'm sure the hearing transcrpits willl show what the proposel detailed, because they had already made their direction clear as to the plan being implemented this fall.

Basically it looks like they are disregarding votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's "official"
Originally Posted By: lcornice
Is there still a zone 4? Nope, it goes to Zone 2 this year. Where's my flame suit?

I am really surprised that so many folks were against the changing of zone 4 to a consecutive 9 day season. I don't see it changing how people hunt too much. It will be the same for my neighbor this year as most years past. He'll pull the trigger within one hour of opening shooting and be done deer hunting for the year. Meanwhile, I'll wait for the thirty-pointer, and spend as much time in-stand as possible.

Originally Posted By: lcornice
Will Muzzleloader's need to apply for doe tags? Most likely NOT people who only hunt muzzleloader and don't buy a firearm license.

This will be interesting. Will someone who firearms hunted be able to party hunt during ML season for a doe with someone who did not firearms hunt?

I do agree. Some people just do not enjoy quality recreational time. I feel that spending time afield makes one apprecite hunting way more than others.

Very good questions all around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised more people haven't commented on this one, must be off fishing - or working smile !! This will hit home once we get closer to hunting season.

I've hunted zone 4 for 25+ years and here are my random thoughts:

1)Public hunting land - The people that this will hurt the most are the people that hunt public land. Having a 2 day and a 4 day season helped spread the hunters out over two weekends, now everybody will flock to that first weekend with the hope of getting first crack at any big bucks around.

2) Private land access - It will also affect private land access. For that past few years my party has shared access on two 80 acre parcels, we hunt the first weekend, they hunt the second weekend. Now if we can't come to an agreement, we'll be restricted to the one 80 acre spot. I could easliy see a scenario where access to a private parcel would be restricted because "my son has seen a nice 12 point around and doesn't want anyone else hunting until he gets him".

Hunter recruitment is a big issue but making it more crowded on public land and restricting access on private land won't help recurit more hunters.

3) Deer harvest - I think you'll see a higher number harvested and definately a higher percentage of bucks harvested. If you have 9 days, you can hold out for that buck. And if your party has 4 tags, and you only fill 3 on that first weekend, the odds are someone in the party will keep hunting until that 4th tag is filled. The DNR can regulate the overall harvest by regulating doe tags but the bucks will take a hit.

4) Midweek hunting - the people that will benefit from this change will be people that can take time off during the week, less pressure and crowding. It will affect the mid-week pheasant hunters and archery hunters, you'll have to pay more attention to that red coat that you see off in the distance, it may be a guy carrying slugs.

Overall this change won't affect me much, I have private land to hunt on but I pity the public land hunters, its going to be a zoo that first weekend.

What I don't understand is why the change was made?? Surveys that I've seen said that the zone 4 hunters were against it, so why make the change - under the excuse of 'simplifying'?? Whats so complex about a 2 day season and a 4 day season? lcornice?

I'd also like to hear from some of you guys that hunt in zones that have recently changed from zone 4 to zone 2, how has the change affected your hunt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to do a podcast with Deitz here pretty soon with these exact topics. I'd rather do that than type a long response if that's okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to hear from some of you guys that hunt in zones that have recently changed from zone 4 to zone 2, how has the change affected your hunt?

We were zone 4 until last year, when we went to zone 2.

We hunt private land, so I wasnt concerned with any additional pressure on our land.

We had utilized All Season tags for a number of years, so we were already hunting multiple weekends, and multiple seasons.

My biggest concern going to Zone 2 was the fact that there were going to be more people hunting opening weekend, whereas before there were the split seasons as Blackjack mentioned. More people hunting opening weekend, more pressure on deer, potentially more deer harvested.

More deer harvested wasnt appealing at all to us. Our permit area is a 5 tag zone. We have really struggled the past 3 years just to see deer. And its not just us. We have talked with several neighboring land owners, and the theme is the same. Seeing deer has been a challenge. Last season in 2 weekends of rifle hunting, Dad and I saw 3 deer total. Year before wasnt much better.

So I cant say how going to Zone 2, versus Zone 4 has affected our hunt so far, but it is still a concern that it can only lead to more harvest, as compared to a Zone 4 set up like we had before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bad part is for people like our party. Like one person said. They hunt first weekend the other party hunts second weekend. Well I am one that hunts second weekend. Now yes I used the All Season license but I bowhunt, slug hunt the second weekend ONLY, and MZ. But there are many of the people in my slug hunting party that only go the second weekend. Now there WILL be poeple out in the woods everyday before us if we still just hunt the second weekend. I was very upset that there were NO meetings in Mankato. The closest one was an hour away and I could not just go because my wife works nights.

Sorry for my ranting but I do not like it one bit. There is not enough room in our area to combine the seasons into one.

FROGGY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could result in less pressure on Zones 1 and 2. In the past I had traveled to an open zone, 1 or 2, during the week. Now with gas prices, and the same seasons in old zones 4 and 2, I will be more likely sticking to home zone 4 if I still have a tag. Likely won't be noticeable though, because those woods to the north were usually pretty empty of hunters during the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to do a podcast with Deitz here pretty soon with these exact topics. I'd rather do that than type a long response if that's okay.

Sounds good.

Please someone put a note on this Deer forum when that podcast is posted so we can all listen - and comment on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blackjack... I am recording with Lou on Friday, will have the show up sunday evening I hope... I will post it in here and on this thread... THanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: lcornice
I'm going to do a podcast with Deitz here pretty soon with these exact topics. I'd rather do that than type a long response if that's okay.

Sounds good.

Please someone put a note on this Deer forum when that podcast is posted so we can all listen - and comment on.

Hey now, Deitz said nothing about being able to comment! smile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deitz, make sure you ask him why the change was made to zone 4, even when the majority of hunters surveyed were against it!!! And also tell him that we appreciate his time, its nice getting answers straight from the DNR deer sheriff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deitz, make sure you ask him why the change was made to zone 4, even when the majority of hunters surveyed were against it!!! And also tell him that we appreciate his time, its nice getting answers straight from the DNR deer sheriff!

Blackjack,

I'll answer it now (and Friday). The majority of hunters who attended the meetings actually supported the change. In total, there were 12 meetings around the state, plus an online comment period. In total, 721 people provided comment and 69% supported the proposal. Of the 5 meetings that were held in Zone 4 (Hutchinson, Watson, Worthington, Blue Earth, and Marshall), 271 commented and 59% supported the recommendation. There was opposition at 2 of the 5 (Marshall, Worthington) but attendees at the other 3 were supportive.

In my career, I've learned that the majority of people who post to forums, send emails, and pick up the phone express opposition no matter the issue. That's not a bad thing; however, it may not be reflective of the population-at-large. For example, you see a lot of letters to the editor and forum posts to do away with buck party hunting. Based on that information, you'd think 80% of people want that to that to happen. However, every random survey of hunters we've done never shows more than 40-45% support.

Please don't that the wrong way. I'm in no way belittling those who are opposed to changes. It's just the harsh reality of life that people who are opposed to something are more likely to publicly express their opinion. You just never hear from the satisfied customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question, since zone 4 is gone, and it became zone 2, where is the rifle use line, same as before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question, since zone 4 is gone, and it became zone 2, where is the rifle use line, same as before?

Same, it didn't change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: BLACKJACK
Deitz, make sure you ask him why the change was made to zone 4, even when the majority of hunters surveyed were against it!!! And also tell him that we appreciate his time, its nice getting answers straight from the DNR deer sheriff!

Blackjack,

I'll answer it now (and Friday). The majority of hunters who attended the meetings actually supported the change. In total, there were 12 meetings around the state, plus an online comment period. In total, 721 people provided comment and 69% supported the proposal. Of the 5 meetings that were held in Zone 4 (Hutchinson, Watson, Worthington, Blue Earth, and Marshall), 271 commented and 59% supported the recommendation. There was opposition at 2 of the 5 (Marshall, Worthington) but attendees at the other 3 were supportive.

In my career, I've learned that the majority of people who post to forums, send emails, and pick up the phone express opposition no matter the issue. That's not a bad thing; however, it may not be reflective of the population-at-large. For example, you see a lot of letters to the editor and forum posts to do away with buck party hunting. Based on that information, you'd think 80% of people want that to that to happen. However, every random survey of hunters we've done never shows more than 40-45% support.

Please don't that the wrong way. I'm in no way belittling those who are opposed to changes. It's just the harsh reality of life that people who are opposed to something are more likely to publicly express their opinion. You just never hear from the satisfied customer.

lcornice, thanks for responding, and setting the facts straight. Nice to hear that the DNR is using actual facts and figures when they're setting the rules. And I agree with you, too often you hear from just the vocal minority rather than the population at large. QDM and antler point restrictions are another issue where the vocal minority is trying to have their way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have the podcast done, Lou was great!!! Answered a lot of questions, and I myself am more comfortable with the changes after hearing how they went down. I normally do not release a podcast till Sunday night/Monday, but this is speacial.. so for those interested, here it is.. I am only going to post it here for now and will put it up in the main hunting forum and on the main page of FM on Monday.

http://hotspotoutdoors.com/podcast/hsopodcast061508.mp3

Thanks again Mr.Cornicelli for taking the time to answer the questions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the podcast Deitz and Lou. It was the first one that I was able to listen all the way through laugh.

Surprised to hear that most folks don't read the regs. I have always read the parts that pertain to what I hunt. Just throw down a copy next to the thrown, then read some whenever the urge arises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is why make a .22 caliber center fire cartridge legal to take big game in the rifle zones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:
Thanks for the podcast Deitz and Lou. It was the first one that I was able to listen all the way through laugh.

Ouch, thats going to leave a mark!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • I tried to purchase the screws yetti uses from Fastenal who is their vendor for the screws. They are only sold in large reels designed for a self loading screwgun. I finally called Casey at Glacial lake docks where I purchased my yetti and he sent me out the amount I needed. They work great to add additional fir strips. The plastic used to tie them together comes right off as you screw them in. Hope that helps. 
    • Sorry...was wrong on the specs.   Manufacturer is Core Ice.  It was 1450# for a 12' and 1250# for a 8'.  
    • I believe you want to use a zinc coated or galvanized steel according to the charts.  I'm sure someone will come along to correct me
    • In the back room there is a company that is using bonded foam panels (similar to garage door panels, but really clean looking), and had weights of 1250# for a 12' and 1450# for a 16'.  Aluminum trailer frames that could convert to a skid frame.  Can't recall the name.  I'm sure they were spendy, but I can see a concept like that going somewhere for the hardcore fishing crowd.   Yetti, Firebrand, Big Bite, and Glacier all had really nice display models.      Lots of campers (disguised as fish houses) out there at prices that make me want to jump into the business.  I was in two different manufacturers houses with prices well over $30k that had wire nuts for connections.  That is going to be a fun adventure for someone 2-3 years down the road when they find out their manufacturer saved $15 on their wiring.           
    • Thank you for all the help!  Ended up going with the Marcum VS485C.  After some research, there were a few other Marcums that were on the list (825 & 625), the Aqua Vu HD, and the Pan Cam.  The mini cams from all manufactures weren't what I was looking for, but they are cool and do have their place.     After seeing everything in person, I think the Aqua Vu HD had the best camera/screen.  The Marcums were a little bit behind, but the 825, 625, 485, and Pan Cam had similar real life clarity.  The 485 won out because of the $300 price point vs the others at $450-700, and was almost identical for resolution, other than the HD.
      I honestly think these cameras are all about 5+ years behind in technology in comparison to the broader camera/tv screen market.  Running off a 7-9ah battery is probably one of the limiting factors.  Another may be the cold.  The main reason (IMO) is that the manufacturers are hoping they can incrementally rape us by trickling out technology each year, similar to the computer manufacturers of the 90s/early 2000's.  For the price of a middle of the road underwater camera, I can buy a Chinese made 50" TV (these all have Chinese made 5-8" screens) and a GoPro or Sony Action Cam (which is 10x's the picture quality).       
    • Any newcomers in the wheelhouse business at the Ice show in St. Paul?
    • Im sure it's hard to see through your Liberal tears.  
    • Well Molly doesn't have any snow on her.   You been drinkin?  
    • 70 pages dealing with Donald Trump and I can't find much that says anything on the positive side, of course in the past year and a half he hasn't said much that's been positive either.
  • Our Sponsors