DNR Releases Early Deer Harvest Figures.

[DonBo]

News Releases

Hunters take fewer deer during firearms season but harvest is on track

(Released November 24, 2009)

Minnesota’s firearms deer harvest is down 11.6 percent from 2008 but on track with expectations, according to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

Since the season opened Nov. 7, preliminary results show that hunters have harvested 151,000 animals, 20,000 fewer than last year following the third weekend of hunting. The decrease reflects fewer opportunities for hunters to harvest antlerless deer in about half of the state’s deer management areas.

“The strategy for 2009 is to allow deer populations to build and stabilize by reducing opportunities to take antlerless deer,” said Lou Cornicelli, DNR big game coordinator. “We expect hunters to harvest about 200,000 deer, or one-fifth of the state’s wild deer population. We’re on track to do just that once the final numbers are in and counted for all deer seasons.”

Hunters have harvested about 19,000 fewer antlerless deer than last year, accounting for the majority of the decline. Harvest of bucks is only about 1,200 animals behind last year. Hunter numbers are nearly identical to last year.

“The harvest of bucks is the most stable indicator of deer population,” Cornicelli said. “Nearly the same number of bucks has been harvested, which suggests that deer are still there to be taken. Since fewer hunters have the option of harvesting an antlerless deer, the overall numbers have decreased.”

Cornicelli said hunters also have been especially cooperative in the DNR’s efforts to sample deer for Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in southeastern Minnesota and Bovine Tuberculosis (TB) in northwestern Minnesota.

DNR-staffed stations in southeastern Minnesota have sampled 2,350 deer for CWD. In northwestern Minnesota, 1,468 deer have been sampled for Bovine TB. Minnesota hunters harvested about 222,000 deer last year. The highest recorded harvest was 290,000 deer in 2003.

“Hunters are harvesting more deer than we did historically but not as many as when the deer population reached its peak in the early 2000s,” said Cornicelli. “With population goals being met in many areas, harvest numbers are showing that we’re beginning to level out to where we want to be.”

[Gordie]

thanks DB thats comfortating

[DonBo]

Very similar stories over in Wisconsin. Only for some reason they (DNR) have decided to LENGHTEN the season next year! Go figure...

[slovene]

Curious to see what the drop in percentage per specific region was.

Here in the Northeast, the season was a tough one at best for most I have talked to. We'll wait and see.

[Musky Buck]

Couldn't have been up in Ottertail county unless people were using silencers on their rifles, however huge county with tons of prime land but our 23 guys and another group of 14 guys combined for 10 deer. 10 for 37. With an est. 40,000 hit on roads, a definite % are never registered,some aren't registered to save that muzzy tag or later in rifle season tag or late bow and the wolf kill is around from what I read 50,ooo animals, is that true or was the paper I read wrong, I thought that was way high, but the DNR got their wish when the intensive zones were pummeled. The deal is we have basically 2 big game animals available to hunt, if we had mulies or elk or antelope people wouldn't ever get in an uproar. I'm not as concerned as I sound because where I hunt my problems won't go away whether the herd grows or not.

[Musky Buck]

Sorry, they still would get in an uproar, just not as dramatic.

[leech~~]

After reading the title I really didn't want to open this to hear that it was another "record year" like they post just about every year! But mark my words, by the time Muzzle and Bow it is over! It will be the 2-3 highest ever again! Bet's?

[Arctic]

I don't think the DNR gets into the business of faking numbers. I do think that the real kill numbers are higher due to the fact that some "hunters" don't register their deer, and a fair number of deer are wounded and die later.

[leech~~]

Artic, I don't think they fake numbers either. I just think their Abacus is broke!

[spivak]

Just anecdotally I'm sure the reported number is a few tens of thousands short of the deer actually shot. I also believe that the DNR accounts for this when considering the state of the deer herd. Moving to NE Minnesota, where many hunt their own or their friends land, I hear that many deer never make the trip to get registered but miraculously become chops, steaks, and nestled in the freezer.

[Deitz Dittrich]

Then is it really the DNR's fault? If all these deer are going un-registered. an unregistered deer is poached in my opinion!

[james_walleye]

Hard to believe. I have never heard a more quiet deer season.

[buddha]

I hunt down in the cornfields and hardly a person I talked to shot any deer. There are always groups that shoot deer but ours didn't and we didn't hear many good reports this year. Should be a lot next year.

[bogwalker]

Talk to loggers and others who practically live in the woods and ask them if they are seeing more or fewer deer than in the past. Good numbers of deer always seem to leave lots of tracks and other sign even if hunters are not seeing deer.

Local big game registration stations have registered 30% fewer deer than last year so far. Deer numbers are way down in the areas where I live and hunt.

[Fishfanatic]

After reading some of the replys, I just had to chime in with my two cents. First of all I disagree with Arctic about the DNR faking numbers. Do you realize what's at stake? Image if the DNR put out the real number showing a decimated heard, guess what would happen? The tourism would go down, retail sales would slump, hotels would be crying and some restaurants would go belly up. The DNR doesn't want to be responsible for this! This is just Great PR.

In all actuallity this season was horrible! not just for me, but the for 50 to 60 other people I spoke with. I cruised the back roads and spoke to as many hunters as I could find. Each with the same bad luck. (DNR Calls this Management)

I would personally like to establish a group of people to Audit the DNR and the REAL numbers that were reported. Forget the news releases. If you know anything about business, these are always slanted in the direction of the business they are about.

The DNR is definately SLANTED.

As for you leech, you are right on! I'm on your side about taking bets...

Later,

[picksbigwagon]

Does the freedom of information act come into play here with state government? If so contact the DNR and get their numbers, it is all computerized so it should be accurate, assuming that everyone who shot a deer registered it as you are supposed to do. So fishfinatic, contact the DNR and get their information, it is all public record so they should release those numbers to you.

[lakevet]

Iowa DNR thinks about 91% of deer get registered. Read info on their HSOforum

lakevet

[picksbigwagon]

Iowa started registering deer 3 or 4 years ago, it is done on the phone or internet, up until that time, you were to mail it in, but it wasn't enforced.

[CANOPY SAM]

I don't presume to speak for hunters in other areas of the state, but what I found particularly intriguing, and frustrating this year was the overall quantity of deer sign afield, yet so few deer sightings during daylight hours.

We saw plenty of deer in our area pre-season scouting, yet once the rifle season opened everything vanished almost immediately.

Walking deep CRP acreage we found an abundance of well used fresh trails, beds everywhere, scrapes and rubs along tree-lines, all the tell-tale stuff that indicates good numbers of deer in the area. We just couldn't get "on" the animals.

Those we did jump didn't get up until we were almost on top of them. Pretty typical for prairie grass-land hunting. Same thing in the cat-tails. They just don't move until they absolutely have too.

Someone spoke earlier of the animals just getting smarter after so many years of being chased. I, for one, would tentatively place a wager on that bet.

Look at the snow goose situation. Those birds have been shown to live for up to 30+ years. They're traveling in larger and larger numbers, and getting harder and harder to coax into a decoy spread. They're getting smarter with every seasonal migration, and they have much smaller brains than a white-tailed deer.

I also spoke to several other parties throughout the season. One group I know drove 7 different small to medium sized groves on the last day of the season, and guess how many animals they moved? Zero! Nothing! Nadda!

I'm pretty confident that our animals, once pressured, move into the thickest, nastiest cat-tail sloughs, briar patches, and impenitrable cover they can, and they don't come out till well after dark.

It's also intersting to note how many folks are seeing a peak of activity on trail cams starting at 01:00 a.m. now. Not 6 p.m. or 9 p.m., but 1:00 a.m.! They obviously wait until it's VERY quiet before they get up for dinner.

Nope, there's tons of recent deer sign out there. We just had mild weather, clear moon-lit nights, and overwhelming hunting pressure. I think this all adds up to fewer shooting opportunities (and smarter deer) throughout the state. But that's just my humble opinion.

[ntrider]

i hunt in 214 and had a great yr...saw more deer than the last couple yrs...everyone i spoke to saw deer in the area too...may not have harvested deer but saw them...also, i think the dnr is doing a great job managing the population...i should say anything north of st cloud...i am unfamilier with the whole 3b issue and such but i remember when it was all lottery and you could go 5 yrs without getting a permit...i also believe that the dnr has a system in place that takes into account a figure for unregistered deer or wounded and lost???

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Here is a snipit from an article from the Duluth News Tribune:

"With 98 percent of deer registrations reported across Northeastern Minnesota, the 2009 deer harvest is down 20 percent from last year, according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. And last year’s harvest was down about 20 percent from the 2007 harvest.

Across the northeast, registrations were down as much as 39 percent in the International Falls area and as little as 10 percent in the Cloquet area, according to DNR figures.

Overall across the region, the adult buck harvest was down 6 percent, and the antlerless deer harvest was down 33 percent. Minnesota’s firearms deer season ran from Nov. 7 through Sunday.

“This is a pretty dramatic decline,” said Jeff Lightfoot, DNR regional wildlife manager at Grand Rapids. “When you put this year coupled with last year, which was pretty similar, it’s a pretty significant drop.”

Over the past few years, the DNR, based on public input, has been trying to lower deer populations across much of Northeastern Minnesota. That has been done to reduce impact on forests and car crashes with deer as well as to decrease deer predation on gardens and shrubs.

The winter of 2008-2009, especially across then northern tier of the state, was harsher than most other recent winters, causing significant deer mortality, DNR wildlife managers say."

a 40% drop in 2 years is pretty significant.... blew me away when I read it.

[ntrider]

dont know if i missed this but with all the talk about registrations being down...does anyone know what the percentage is of areas going from intensive to management to lottery and also how many "less" lottery permits have gone out...if you get those numbers for the last 3 yrs and then take a look at the decline in registrations you should be able to see if there are actually quite a few less deer around or a little less deer with no opportunity to take because of permits...would be interesting...

[Bear55]

Couldn't have been up in Ottertail county unless people were using silencers on their rifles, however huge county with tons of prime land but our 23 guys and another group of 14 guys combined for 10 deer. 10 for 37. With an est. 40,000 hit on roads, a definite % are never registered,some aren't registered to save that muzzy tag or later in rifle season tag or late bow and the wolf kill is around from what I read 50,ooo animals, is that true or was the paper I read wrong, I thought that was way high, but the DNR got their wish when the intensive zones were pummeled. The deal is we have basically 2 big game animals available to hunt, if we had mulies or elk or antelope people wouldn't ever get in an uproar. I'm not as concerned as I sound because where I hunt my problems won't go away whether the herd grows or not.

Musky we kicked your butt, 3 groups totaling 36 hunters managed 4 deer in northern Itasca county. Not many wolves around either, they must have moved on to find the deer.

[Bear55]

Over the past few years, the DNR, based on public input, has been trying to lower deer populations across much of Northeastern Minnesota. That has been done to reduce impact on forests and car crashes with deer as well as to decrease deer predation on gardens and shrubs.

This is a little disturbing considering the NE deer per square mile are already some of the lowest in the state to begin with. I wish the DNR would just come out and tell us what their goals are.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Well, for a few years, (05 & 06 specifically), I remember on a few occasions driving Hwy 61 from Grand Marais to/from Duluth and seeing an ungodly ammount of deer feeding along the road. It was almost rediculous. I seriously lost count one early spring evening heading back to Duluth from G.M. and losing count at over 200 deer feeding along the road side.... almost smoked 2 of them with my truck. It was crazy how many there were. I know a lot of those deer migrate towards the lake and are concentrated, but I do believe there was a very high deer density for up there.

Saw lots of corpses laying along the hwy, too.

But the last 2 years (I have since moved away and don't drive that stretch nearly as often) I have hardly seen a deer, dead or alive. So, needless to say, I think the goal of decreasing the population has been reached. However, where I hunt in Two Harbors there is as much sign as there has ever been, but the number of sightings was down a lot from our group.... But I also think we all sat a lot more then usual with the warm weather.

Something also to concider up there is, I think part of the strategy was to lessen the deer's imapct with the moose populations as well.