Jump to content

Satchmo

we are 'the leading edge' I Share on HSO
  • Content Count

    231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Satchmo

  • Rank
    Sr HotSpotOutdoors.com Family
  • Birthday 11/02/1962

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Nimrod,MN

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think any major changes are imminent at this point, but let's face it monstermoose78, you and I, along with everyone else have been told what we can shoot our whole lives. Look no further than applying for doe permits, buck lotteries, intensive harvest, bucks only areas, youth permits, rifle/shotgun zones, early doe seasons, late doe seasons, and current APR zones. Make no mistake about it, the rules and regulations will change in the future. You can either be for them, against them, or apathetic, but change they will. I would just like the whole process to more open and democratic, instead of letting the loud get their way. I'd also like to see the general gun hunting population get as much say in things as the lobbyists.
  2. Very good observation. To quote commissioner Landwehr, "You don't get what you want, you get what you fight for". While this new group was put together to try and help hunters stay informed, there are others out there that are actively lobbying for their personal agendas quite heavily. MWA claims to be a collaboration of several deer hunting groups with around 14,000 followers. They also claim to be a Non-profit, but I was unable to find them registered with the state of MN. (This does not mean they aren't, since no group that takes in less than $50K/year are required to file a form 990). Other groups haven't filed a 990 form in over a decade. I would suggest that anyone out there looking to join a conservation group do some due diligence, and look in to exactly what that groups goals, agenda, affiliations, and relationships to other organizations are. While some are exactly what they state and appear to be, others have very cozy relationships with the DNR, QDMA, the deer farm industry, the timber industry, insurance companies, etc... Like the current political climate, those that scream the loudest have a better chance to get what they want. Some of the actual registered nonprofits with fairly small memberships are getting the ear of the DNR by renting booths at outdoor events, running active Facebook pages, and getting blurbs in the editorial sections of outdoor publications. One such group does a lot of "Polls" on its sight of less than 500 followers, always seems to get the result they want, and then touts this as how all hunters in MN feel. I highly suspect that this SE MN, pro APR group of trophy hunting bow hunters is very in touch with the 500,000 gun hunters of MN. While I don't have a specific agenda, I do not have a problem calling out these special interest groups that claim to speak for the majority of hunters in this state. Those that sit back and just let the DNR make our herd decisions without input, will get exactly what the loudest special interest groups want in the end and have no right to gripe about it. Just ask commissioner Landwehr. Sorry for the rant.
  3. ^^^^Ding,Ding,Ding..........We have a winner! Thanks ANYFISH2. This entire conversation should be about banding together to build a healthy sustainable herd that everyone can enjoy as they choose.
  4. Your point is very valid on the lack of habitat in much of southern MN as it is in much of the old zone 4 area. Each area of the state has a different "hole in the bucket". While that area lacks habitat, many other areas, including mine, have plenty of habitat, but lack high quality food to get the herd thru hard winters.
  5. Leech, I think many areas in WI have herds that have declined just as much as MN. I hunt SE of Turtle Lake, and used to see 25+ deer on opening morning before 9am on a regular basis. Now I feel good if I see a few critters the whole weekend. The many years of "T" seasons, "Herd control, and liberal antlerless tags have dropped numbers in that area to a fraction of what they once were. It is what it is. I don't think they are doing better than MN is, but they started with a lot larger herd. Their wolf issues will continue in the north, and CWD in the south. I don't envy their situation either. FYI, My land sits on the south end of the wolf range in NE Wadena county, MN. They generally do not bother my area except in the spring during calving season, although I have two of the buggers wandering around last November during rifle hunting. I usually have way more issues with coyotes and bears taking my fawns than wolves.
  6. Big Dave2, Just throwing the no party hunting out there as one possible solution. I certainly do not advocate getting rid of it. There are several other things being thrown around out there that I don't agree with as well.
  7. Focus guys! Who here is advocating for APR or the end to party hunting? Answer..........Noone! To hell with the special interest groups. But if you think you can maintain the status quo for the last 3 decades and expect a healthy herd with the way it is being managed now, think again. You will see an even further decline in hunters and hunter satisfaction. I would much rather shoot one deer per year than shoot 5 this year and then none the next 4 seasons. It's called sustainability. It's not the 80s, 90s, or even early 2000s.
  8. Leech, I was not at all trying to compare the hunting between the two states. That is apples and oranges. I was simply stating that I like their permit area system. I've hunted the WI rifle system for the last 25 years, and there are many similarities and some glaring differences. 1) Yes, the state is farther south with less winter kill. 2) There are also many similarities in terrain, but again a generally milder climate. 3) WI has fewer wolves, but still has it's share of predators. 4) Part 1- I've seen far more rut activity in WI over the last 25 years than I have in MN. Part 2 - Are you kidding me? Most turkey dinners are served at deer camp or within relatively short driving distance. This is a religion over there! They will only miss a part of Sundays for a Packer game. Thanksgiving don't mean squat. It's a four day hunting weekend!
  9. PF, You're absolutely right. The only way to limit harvest and rebuild the herd in many areas is thru regulation, because too many people still to do things the old fashioned way and kill everything that the DNR says they can. The antlerless tag allocations are based on faulty population estimates at best. The most accurate assessment of the herd comes from the boots on the ground. Which means YOU the hunters. I take NO heed in the DNR numbers in my area. WE manage our local population. My group passes small bucks when there are few & take does when they are plentiful. We monitor our deer year round, do habitat improvements throughout the year, and take out predators when we can. This however is not the norm in the gun hunting circles. The APR guys don't even follow their own advise when it comes to doe harvest. I find that most of the vocal, hardcore APR advocates are hunting SE MN, where the populations have been over goal for years, and they are trophy hunting. In many of those areas, they SHOULD be taking does to bring the herd dynamics back in to line. Those guys want everyone else to follow their plan that benefits their trophy hunting goals. A large part of the rest of the MN would benefit more from protecting does, not bucks. I'd much rather see a plan that benefits the herd, not the special interest groups.
  10. Even though my group passes small bucks and practices selective doe harvest, That is completely by choice. I also choose to put in food plots and drop aspen, birch, maple, or ash trees for the deer in Jan/Feb to help them out in my swamp/cattle country area. I do not care what the neighbors do. I also do not believe there would be any reason to halt party hunting or to implement APRs if the herd was managed for a higher more stable number. We need to stop the big pendulum swings in doe harvest however, and we certainly need a much more accurate population assessment and a fine tuned harvest plan to accomplish that. I do like the way WI has their units broken down by county to give them the ability to fine tune the harvest. Currently in MN, some of the antlerless areas in MN span some large areas with multiple kinds of terrain and very different herd dynamics. Very large counties could even be broken down. As far as APRs, I'm not a giant fan, but even if get pushed through in SE MN by the small, loud special interest groups pushing for it there, I would want all youth 16 and under exempted from them.
  11. Correct! APRs could be set at whatever they want. I don't like APRs unless a region has a large enough antlerless herd to support the extra pressure it will take when guys aren't seeing legal bucks. (think fill the freezer) Cervid farms are whole other can of worms. Not enough monitoring & regulation of them. I wish they would all go away. CWD is here now and it's not going away. I can only hope it stays contained to southern MN. If "Party hunting" were stopped altogether (which I don't think will happen) the harvest would drop and the herd rebound would take care of itself in many areas IMHO, but it may be too bitter a pill to swallow for many groups.
  12. Exactly Dave! Trying to build a group of concerned hunters to try to give the generally passive group of folks a place to voice their opinions. There is nothing to buy, no advertising, and no set agenda. Just a place to bounce ideas and gauge what deer hunters are thinking, and Facebook reaches a much larger and more diverse group than forums these days. While I still like participating in forums these days, they are smaller communities with smaller demographics, and in the deer policy world, numbers count.
  13. This is an informal group started to help everyone discuss the issues facing our MN firearm deer hunting. As we face the challenges of what to do about CWD, special interest groups, APRs, and accurate population estimates, it would be nice to hear from the nearly 500,000 hunters spread out across all areas of our state. As this group grows and hopefully bands together, polls will be done to determine what you the people would like to see in our deer herd and from the people who manage them. There are several small groups out there today that are loudly lobbying for support of their positions, but the gun hunter have traditionally been silent and left all the decisions to the DNR. We'd like to get the opinions of the hunters directly from the source..
  14. If your seeing small does with fawns, there is a good possibility that they are simply yearling does that were bred as fawns last December, and with the mild winters we've had, those pregnant fawns have had a much easier time surviving winter. You may not like seeing those small deer, but it truly is a good sign for a population rebound.
  15. You probably have to go in to the menu and set the camera to Motion Detect, instead of Time Lapse mode.
×
×
  • Create New...