deer hunting

[winterwalleye]

anyone disappointed with the 2009 season?I think the dnr better get a grip on their regulations or there will be hardly any deer left. Shooting 5 deer 1 year then permit next year is ridiculous. Never should we be allowed to shoot 5 a year. IF they think there aren't enough youth hunters, they better keep the population up or it will only get much worse.1 bad winter and the wolf population and you might as well forget about hunting for years, especially up north.

[Arctic]

I wouldn't worry so much about the wolves, as their numbers vary with the deer herd. When the deer herd was knocked down by a couple of severe winters in the mid-90s, wolf pups starved to death and wolf numbers went down. When there are a lot of deer (like for the past ten years), wolf numbers increase. But wolf numbers don't increase like deer do because only so many wolf packs can co-exist across the landscape.

The number of antlerless deer killed by hunters probably affects deer numbers the most, followed by winter kill in some years. I think the DNR has misjudged deer numbers over the past two seasons and maybe too many does were killed. But estimating deer numbers is really only an estimate based on the best available information, and deer populations can recover very fast when the kill is managed.

I would also add that a lot of hunters are also to blame for a diminished deer herd, as some folks never register their kill, fill non-hunting family member's tags (wives),

and hunt over bait.

[NoWiser]

2009 was the funnest season I have had since I started deer hunting 13 years ago. I didn't see as many as I have in the past, but saw enough to keep me content. I don't blame the DNR, I blame some of the hunters. Just because they had a 5 deer limit doesn't mean you need to shoot your limit. You can stop at one or two if you don't think your area can handle it. A pattern I noticed this year is that it is the EXACT same groups who, 2 and 3 years ago, were bragging about shooting a dozen deer for three or four people, that are now complaining the most about not seeing any deer. Doesn't take a genius to figure out you shot them all. Last years winter didn't help much either. I'm not saying you did this, Winterwalleye, I'm just saying its something I've noticed. Unfortunately, a responsible hunting party surrounded by a couple irresponsible ones also has to pay the consequences of their actions.

[BobT]

Are we going to go back into the wolf debate?

I hunt "up north" and we did quite well in terms of numbers. Seven hunters, 5 bucks taken. We did see a lack of does this year in area 175 where we hunted. Just 10 miles away my brother-in-law and his two sons saw 18 does and took one buck and one doe on Saturday and Sunday of opening weekend. They were hunting intensive harvest so they took a couple more does by season's end. Areas vary quite a bit.

[deerminator]

We're in a lottery area but I've seen more does than ever before this year. Does, does and more does. But that's on our land and part of our permit area. It could be completely different 10 miles away. The DNR can do what they can do by permit areas and I think they're doing a pretty good job. Its up to individual hunters to help control their destiny within their own (meaning public and/or private) hunting lands when it comes to seeing more deer. I know of one group that took plenty of bucks this year off their land using the mother-in-law and girlfriend tags. Next year they'll see fewer bucks and blame the DNR. I'm not saying that's your case. I'm just saying that the bag limit isn't the end all. It's what helps drive and provide control to it all. Individual hunters also have a big part in determining the population via sound management methods and restraint from bending the rules.

[winterwalleye]

I didn't ever shoot more than one deer, but giving the hunters the right to take 5 deer is wrong.Some people will shoot 5 just because its legal.Don't give them this option and make it a stiffer fine for people not regisering their deer.

[deerminator]

I would say then if you and enough people are passionate about that, you need to let the DNR know directly. The antler-point restriction people may get their way soon in parts of the state so why not reducing bag limits in intensive harvest zones. The problem is, that even if you are successful, and the DNR imposes heavy fines for not tagging deer or shooting one for their mother-in-law, that the guys who want to shoot 5 deer are still going to. They'll just do it illegally and more guys will break the law doing so. I'm not saying that's right and I wouldn't but I can tell you its what happens in lottery areas now. The problem is, even if I reported someone, the DNR would have had to catch them in the act to make the conviction stick. Unless their mother-in-law ratted them out. It sucks, for lack of a better word, but many people will choose to do things their own way no matter the law.

[ANYFISH2]

I personally think the DNR is doing a fine job. All this not enough deer or to many deer (like a few years ago) is proof us hunters don't know the dynamics of a population. The DNR surveyed hunters back when the population was high and asked something like in your area is there to many deer, not enough, or just right. This then was taken into account when they made thier new targets for the state and permit areas. Now that they are reaching the targets us hunters are once agian (like always) complaining. Populations fluctuate from area to area every year, no one thing is going to keep everyone happy every year.

As for intensive harvest (5 deer) I agree it is needed, although with the very small percentage of hunters that shoot five deer a season, that isn't going to decimate the herd.

[BobT]

Quote:

I know of one group that took plenty of bucks this year off their land using the mother-in-law and girlfriend tags.

If you didn't report this activity then you are as much to blame for the result.

[BobT]

Quote:

The problem is, even if I reported someone, the DNR would have had to catch them in the act to make the conviction stick. Unless their mother-in-law ratted them out. It sucks, for lack of a better word, but many people will choose to do things their own way no matter the law.

I understand where you're coming from but if you say nothing the CO has no idea where to increase his/her attention. When you make a report, the CO may increase his/her awareness in the area and perhaps catch them in the act the next time. All he/she has to do is watch a little closer for hunters bringing their kill from the woods and check license before they get the deer home and unless the Mother-in-law, girl friend, or other is there to validate it, they are in deep water.

[deerminator]

Bob, I should say I suspect a group is doing this. They say that its all on the up and up but in reality, I suspect different, and other details lead me to believe differently. As in, I have never seen the mother-in-law fire a gun or ever hunt in her life. I'm almost positive but that's not enough for me to make the phone call. I'd actually have to know for certain. So I suppose I was incorrect in saying I know.

[pulleye16]

One guy quoted "many people will do things their own way regardless of the law". No--Many people will OBEY the laws.

No one can honestly say poaching is ruining hunting as what others are saying. Yes-poaching is wrong and kills deer.. But by stopping every poacher you won't control the deer population very much. Rural development, Cars, winters, wolves ...There are WAY to many factors that control deer populations. Hey, maybe we just need to raise the price of gas again...higher gas, less drivers on the road, less deer getting hit!!! LOL As history has shown us, we'll be fine....Take the good years with the bad years!! DNR is doing just fine!

p.s. yes I know poaching is horrible but to use it as an argument for poor deer population is ridiculus.

[mrklean]

well said pulleye

[propster]

Deerminator, I beg to differ. Your suspicions are plenty to make the call. You don't need proof, and aren't expected to provide it. As Bob says, if it does nothing more than increase attention on them or the area then you've done good. All they need to do is go in and look to make sure there's proper tagging, and registration, and things like that. They'll be able to tell right away if something's not quite right and will either investigate further or make a point to keep an eye on them better. I hope in the future you make that call.

[Bear55]

I personally think the DNR is doing a fine job. All this not enough deer or to many deer (like a few years ago) is proof us hunters don't know the dynamics of a population.

I'd say the DNR is doing their best but I wouldn't say they are doing a fine job. Really our state hasn't seen a deer population as large as we have had in the past decade so really the DNR was kind of learning on the job. All the proof you need is look at how many areas jumped from intensive harvest to lotto areas, I highly doubt their goal was to get everyone back to a lotto area. I think they see the overpopulation in other states and got a little nervous and passed out too many doe tags in certain areas. Not to many of these other states have the winters, wolves, and brown its down hunting parties that keep the herd in check like we do.

I also might argue that some hunters have a better idea of the deer population in their area compared to the DNR. I haven't shot a doe in the area I rifle hunt for over 10 years, its been a managed area for 5 of the past 6 years. This area borders Canada to the north and I knew there just aren't that many deer in the area to support all those management tags for that long.

[ANYFISH2]

Bear55, i completely agree that you know the deer population in the "small" area you hunt better. But the DNR cannot manage for 40-640 acre areas, they only can manage per permit area that a lot of variation from one small area to the next. As with anything things can be done better, I trust it will be done better in the future.

[BeezeHound]

I think Bear55 was saying that some hunters have a better feel for their permit area, not just their 40 - 640 acres. I would definitely agree with that. I know several guys who hunt all over my permit area on several different pieces of public and private land and I'm guessing with as much time as they spend afield they would have a pretty darn good idea of how the herd is doing.

[vister]

dont fall off your rocker just yet, but i believe the dnr is doing exactly what they need to do. the reason permit areas go into intensive harvest, is because the zone is becoming over populated with deer. with a high hunter success rate, those deer populations decrease, and become lottery or managed zones. which is exactly what the dnr wants as far as a deer herd. there is not a wolf population in MN great enough to affect great deer loss. sure there may be a permit area or two where wolves are more abundant, but its not enough to worry about driving the whitetail population to near extinction!

even if MN was intensive harvest state wide, nowhere in the regs does it say that every hunter must shoot every anterless deer they see until their tags are full. us hunters have a better idea of the deer herd in a given area than the dnr! just because someone doesnt see a deer in a given weekend from their stand doesnt mean there are no deer in the area. two adjoining 80 acre parcels can be completely different in what deer prefer.

the dnr is more concerned with deer numbers than deer quality, which is kind of a sore spot in my rear end, but our party, and most of our neighbors, are selective in what we harvest. so the 10 square mile area around us has a booming deer population, and GREAT bucks, and we're in a managed zone. choices we've made, not the dnr!

[germanshorthairs]

Looks like they deleted the post that said cornicelli needs to go and left this one as people seem to think the dnr is doing a great job. I disagree. Just read the Outdoor News. After this winter we will be happy to see one deer in the stand. This year was the lowest harvest since the mid 90's. And yet there are still areas that have a 5 deer limit?????????? Also what is with the early anterless-why not wait until after the season and then if numbers are way up(and I say way) then have a late season. Early season is a good way to diminish a deer herd.

[hockeybc69]

Why is it so hard for people to understand that some areas do in fact have too many deer?

Some areas maybe dont have enough.

This fall wasnt too hot for us. But I have hope it was just an off season.

For all the naysayers out there and what you think of the DNR and the job they do, I'd love to put you all in their place for 5 years and see where we end up at.

Armchair biologists. Not what I want running the show.

[ANYFISH2]

Quote:

Armchair biologists. Not what I want running the show.

I couldn't agree more!

[96trigger]

There are a couple of reasons that the numbers are down. A couple would be the fact that many areas went from Intensive harvest to Managed, and Managed to lottery. The other would be sales of permits has been on the decline. There is data to back all of this up.

I do think in some areas of the state, the deer population has fallen, in others it is getting more balanced at or near carrying capacity. The DNR does not want to see the deer population go above carrying capacity, and will regulate accordingly.

To me, the progression seems fairly logical. I know that in my small neck of the woods, the population is still good. Good enough to be Intensive Harvest, does that mean my whole area is? Probably not judging by the DNR putting us at Managed status. I trust the DNR. 20 years ago, we were lucky to get a deer. Now a bad night is not seeing a deer.

[Wobbler]

This has been debated in other posts in this forum under different titles and comes up a lot. I hunt in area 122 a lottery area. 4 of us in a party and we own 80 acres the rest is public land and I hunt public land as I have for years. When it was allowed to shoot 2 deer our party chose not to and shoot only 1. Although the DNR let us we chose to manage our area like some in this post have mentioned we take it in our own hands. Our party chose to shoot 8 points or better 3 years ago. Funny that I hunt in a wolf hotbed (In fact the DNR has wolf trapping signs by us to study them look for my older post on this) yet we saw more deer this year than other years and it only gets better each year. Why? I have no scientific proof but based on our observations we conclude because we do not shoot does, we shoot only mature bucks, let the little ones grow up, and take only good clean shots with kills at the spot of the shot. We went from seeing maybe 3 deer each a season to a deer or 2 a day each of us in an area 10 years ago we saw only 3 deer in the whole season. It is interesting in that we see a fair amount of does but the buck ratio is 5 to 1 bucks to does in our hunting experience. Why.....competition for does because our does have not been touched in years and where there are does bucks will be around. Bucks are roaming all the time around us trying to find hot does where we hunt during the day because their is competition to breed. Even the big boys need to get out during the day and chase because if a doe gets hot there is 2 or 3 bucks that might get to her before the breeder buck gets to. Public hunters around us wonder for years after shooting everything they see (Brown is Down) they did not see a tail this season and wonder why when they come visit us during the season they see what is on our meat pole and out loud ask why they do not have that luck but we have that luck every year. "The DNR does not know what they are doing or the wolves" is what I hear. I laugh and think to myself "look in the mirror that is where the problem lies". I have had people ask what is your group's secret to shooting nice bucks ever year. What is our secret is what I heard twice this season from other hunters who stopped and shared a barley corn with us. Shhhh let me tell all you the secret and it is something everyone can afford but you can't buy at a store but you can buy. Buy into figuring out that if you let small bucks grow up you will see bigger bucks in the future. Buy into the fact that because I have extra tags I don't need to fill them all. Buy into the fact that there will be up and down years in a deer population. Buy into the fact being being a successful hunter is not a matter of how many deer a person can lay out or the size of the buck but the quality of the hunting experience shooting one or not. Did I mention our results......2 10 pointers, a 9 and and 8 pointer all before second weekend. Not trying to brag but we let a lot of baskets and smaller bucks go. Very encouraging for us but this winter's weather will kill deer so we might not have the same success this next season as last but we tried doing our part to manage "OUR herd". Now imagine if others used our little secret where they hunt over 3 or 4 years time. Remember I am in a "Lottery area" and in the big woods (national Forest) not a farm. I wonder if they would have the same success that we have seen? Seeing bigger bucks, more deer, quality of hunt? Don't blame the DNR they are doing the best they can with the resources they have. They are doing a good job trying to make everyone happy which is impossible.

[buckhunter21]

Well put Wobbler, hopefully someday most people will see how easy it is to make better hunting experiences for the future. All it takes is a little will power to let maybe one or two deer walk a year. I think it is catching on more an more every year, people are passing up more and more small bucks, not shooting fawns, and if they see the population down they will hold off and not take any deer that year. However it only takes one or two groups nearby to take all of that away from you by mowing down everything they see and using every tag given to them. What can you do I guess but keep doing what your doing and hope they will see the light sooner rather than later.

[jltimm]

I get sick of every other week in the Out- News they bring up the deer harvest numbers and then it goes on to say the numbers are just what the dnr thought they'd be. Like they have it narrowed down to know the hunters will be harvesting the predicted number of animals! The dnr is starting to sound like Denny Green...."They are what we thought they were!"