deer hunting

[JimmyJames]

I am very disappointed with the job the dnr is doing with the deer herd.I guarantee I could do a better job.I own a cabin in northern mn, deer numbers are low as I've ever seen. This sucks cause I'm bringing two young hunters into the sport. Tough when you're not seein anything.The deer numbers in northern mn haven't really changed in the last 40 years, should never be intensive or managed.The big woods has plenty of habitat to support high deer numbers, why not? I've never herd people complain about too many deer.

[JimmyJames]

Good point jltimm, I like when they say hunters are goin to have to get used to it, low numbers are what they want. Big concern with the lack of young hunters, lets lower the numbers so much so alot of these new hunters don't even see one. Brilliant!!

[picksbigwagon]

Wobbler makes a great point, if you want to see more deer, stop shooting the little ones.

[96trigger]

Right now, the DNR only manages for population. They are all about high deer numbers, as they have been since the 1970's.

Funny you guys should be saying that they are all about low numbers when its just the opposite. If you don't believe me, and I expect you won't. Call the DNR, do some research, the way our deer hunting is set up is to increase the deer population.

Its why we have lottery areas and hunt during the prime of the rut. Our whole states deer season is based on killing bucks, not the does that have the offspring and replenish the population.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

I guarantee I could do a better job.

Jimmy James,

You are just another armchair biologist that I would hate to see running the states big game management.

I love how guys like you seem to think you know more from sitting in a stand.

Laughable.

[JimmyJames]

Hey hockey, I don't think I know more, I know I do.I know more from sitting in a stand and scouting than sitting at a desk.

[hockeybc69]

You funny guy.

[BobT]

Personally, I'm not about big, old, tough, bucks. I prefer the succulent, tender, tasty young-ens.

I too hunt up north, Mr. James, and I must disagree with you on a couple counts. I don't know your credentials but I can feel the hot air. I also disagree that the numbers are down. We have enjoyed an average of nearly 70% success rate in our area over the past 25 years. This year alone we took 5 bucks out of seven hunters in the first three days of the season. This is an area that the record shows to have an average hunter success rate of about 35%. I have no complaints about the job the DNR has been doing but then I don't depend on the DNR for my success either.

[Wobbler]

Well said BobT!

[picksbigwagon]

What area are you in up north? A few years ago (4 maybe) we were coyote hunting and grouse hunting up around Lake Wabedo and I was amazed at the number of deer we saw at all times of the day as well. That area needed some thinning out of the herd.

Each area of the state has a deer density and that area definitely needed help in getting their numbers down. I normally hunt the SE part of the state and there is an over abundance of deer down there.

I believe the DNR does meetings in areas around the state dealing with issues such as deer density surveys among other things, maybe you should attend an let them know your feelings. It was less than 10 years ago when areas I hunt, 346 and 349 were lottery only and first season was buck only.

[Wobbler]

JimmyJames,

Do you hunt private or public land? Have you or anyone in your party shot more than 1 deer in the last 5 years? I have my little boy coming out in a few years and he can shoot whatever he want to. The rest of my family understands that and your young ones should too. However, this past season big bucks aside I actually got to sit with my dad in a stand and had a great time felt like I was 11 again instead of 37. Sat with my brother first time ever and we saw 2 silver foxes and it was special. While I shot my biggest buck ever the other things that happened made the hunt for me. I shot a buck my first year hunting (12) and went on a 15 year spell without. Never made me quit. Never made my brother quit. We still hunted hard and it was not because I was a bad hunter just never saw any. There are way more deer now then when I started. My boy shooting a deer or not will not make him hunt again or not. The experience of hunting with his dad, 2 uncles, and grandpa will make the hunt and the deer camp life and other experiences will. Your 2 little ones will enjoy it too even if they do not shoot a deer or only see 1 or 2. If we got a deer ever year it would be called shooting instead of hunting.

[96trigger]

Wobbler, you took the words right out of my mouth.

JimmyJames, Sir, I'm going to give you a bigger spoon sir, to stir the pot.

[germanshorthairs]

Glad to hear Lou is a member of FM- Hopefully he can answer why you would have an early anterless and not a late anterless season?? Why not wait to see if the numbers were still too high after normal rifle season???? Plus, if the winter was shaping up to be a tough one, then you could hold off. Does not make any sense to me-but I guess I am just an armchair biologist any-ways. I guess one thing that boggles me is that some people think that if you are in an intensive area that you should let deer walk and not shoot everything-I totally agree, but the dnr is doing everything to get people to shoot the deer hence why it is intensive. Which I believe is too lower the herd count. My argument is that the herd count is not out of control and there is never a need to allow a 5 deer limit.

[buckhunter21]

I think that in some areas that are in intensive harvest they really do need to take out 5 deer, but alot of the areas in intensive probably shouldnt be taking more than 1 or 2 and that is where it is up to the individual hunters to take it upon themselves to do what they think is best. Just because the dnr gives you 5 tags doesnt mean you have to use every one. The area I hunt we get together with some of the surrounding hunters and get an idea on deer populations and go from there, I know when we first came into Intensive we did need to get rid of some deer but after a couple years we were kind of wondering why they were giving out 5 tags so we took it upon ourselves and shot only what we thought was the right number of does and right now I think we are right where we want to be. If we would of shot every doe we saw until we filled all 5 tags every year we would be in some trouble. So all the people blaming the dnr are you really sure your not the ones at fault? Sure you cant control what your neighbors do but did you even make an effort to go around and tell people what you think needs to be done and what could happen if you keep shooting all these deer? Was there any year you didnt shoot any does because you thought the population was too low? The dnr cant regulate every individual 80 or anything even close to that so of course some areas arent going to be given the right number of tags so thats where its up to you to make the calls. And as far as people putting all the blame on Lou do you really think 1 guy goes around and figures out all the deer populations and makes the laws? Get real and you should be glad we have a guy at his status on this board answering questions and listening to input and considering changes based on that input, at least we know our suggestions are being heard.

[Bowfin]

The northern deer is not uniform - you will get areas which are low on deer and areas which are high.

The speed in which the deer herd bounced back after the 96 and 97 winters, we should error on the side of harvesting more deer rather than less deer.

You got to remember our forests are used for more than just deer hunting. Some on this site don't care about anything but how many deer they are going to see when they venture into "their" woods each fall. The DNR has to take a lot of input from many stakeholders and come up with a decision on deer seasons

Some of the folks they have to try to satisfy:

*The landowners suffering crop damage

*The foresters spending tens of thousands of dollars a year trying to regenerate a healthy forest in spite of the huge damage from deer.

*The insurance companies who pay for deer car collisions

*The wildlife biologists who are trying to keep moose a part of Minnesota's wildlife picture

*The deer hunters who want to keep the herd healthy.

*And the hunters who whine because they didn't see as many deer off their stand as they did on the TV screen watching big buck videos filmed on private controlled ranches

Anybody who thinks DNR wildlife has an easy job or is slacking off is just plumb crazy!

[Odonata]

You got to remember our forests are used for more than just deer hunting. Some on this site don't care about anything but how many deer they are going to see when they venture into "their" woods each fall. The DNR has to take a lot of input from many stakeholders and come up with a decision on deer seasons

Some of the folks they have to try to satisfy:

*The landowners suffering crop damage

*The foresters spending tens of thousands of dollars a year trying to regenerate a healthy forest in spite of the huge damage from deer.

*The insurance companies who pay for deer car collisions

*The wildlife biologists who are trying to keep moose a part of Minnesota's wildlife picture

*The deer hunters who want to keep the herd healthy.

*And the hunters who whine because they didn't see as many deer off their stand as they did on the TV screen watching big buck videos filmed on private controlled ranches

Anybody who thinks DNR wildlife has an easy job or is slacking off is just plumb crazy!

Good points! We, the deer hunters, often forget the bigger picture.

[JimmyJames]

All good points, everyone's entitled to there opinion,even if they're wrong.J/K. I was being somewhat facetious.I love whitetail hunting, in my top 2 favorite things to do.A perfect day for me is all day in the stand.Even if I disagree with the job the dnr is doing ,I'll continue doin it .I love it.

[Musky Buck]

Good luck to the DNR trying to satisfy a half million deer hunters that seem split down the middle on every topic. I wish we could have each hunter with 1 tag. Then in those areas that need thinning, have a late antlerless hunt in those permit areas and it would have to be before Tgiving so shed bucks aren't gunned down by mistake. Having numerous tags and the saving of each owns buck tag has hurt our buck population, we'd be more selective and passing on more bucks if you knew it was one and done. For some reason some seem to think getting 1 buck a season isn't enough. I'm not sure how much more pressure can be applied to the deer where I hunt. I watched many a hunter who I knew took a fair amount of deer rifle hunting only to see them still hunting every night in heated stands with their muzzy's. It's no wonder in my area the deer to this day what's left are still nocturnal. Just some random thoughts.

[uptracker]

Google "slow deer season 2009" and you'll find that it was slow nation wide.

[JimmyJames]

You mean to tell me Mr. Cornicelli is managing the deer herd nation wide? Dang, it was fun while it lasted.

[96trigger]

I was waiting for that, I'm hoping you are saying that tongue in cheek. If you have a problem with the job the DNR is doing, let them know. I have contacted them personally, and found that they know what they are doing, they look at data, and make their decisions based on the data. Sometimes the data for an area might be different than what you are seeing in your backyard. That isn't the DNR's fault.

Mr. JimmyJames, you are quick to judge the DNR and what they are doing. I just have one question. What would you do differently?

[bottom-bouncer]

ATTN!!!! the reason they have a early antlerless season and not a late season is because people will not pay attention and shoot bucks that have dropped there antlers early..

[Jameson]

If a buck has dropped his antlers, will his venison be spoiled?

With low hunter interest their likely will not be a late-anterless season any time soon.

But why should a buck not be shot when it has already dropped it's antlers? Is the meat spoiled? If we have a late doe season it would likely be because an area has become overpopulated with deer. In areas with an overpopulation the primary goal is to reduce the deer herd. Sure, shooting a doe prevents future deer from her, but shooting a shed buck AND a doe will do the same, and more.

[buckhunter21]

Shooting a buck only takes out one deer where taking out a doe could potentially take out several when you consider all of the potential fawns it would have and an extra antlerless season is for the sole purpose of bringing down the population. Minnesota is now considering making extra regulations to help improve the number of mature bucks in the state and allowing people to shoot extra bucks just because they dont have antlers would be a step back from where they are trying to go. I do like the idea of a later antlerless season though as long as it wasnt too late in the year the number of antlerless bucks shot would be very minimal if any.

[hockeybc69]

So if they had a late antlerless hunt in the end of Dec, what percentage of bucks have dropped by then to even worry about shooting a non-antlered buck?

Checked my cams today, and had 129 vids on it from Dec 15th to today. Not a single one antlered buck, or any pics of a deer that had antler drop marks on the head.