DNR's Deer Management Plan

[FUZZER]

Just wondering if others are having the same crazy ups and downs as our hunting camp is having with Lou Cornicelli's management plan. Four years ago we were intensive plus a early doe season (7), then we dropped the next year to managed (2), then back to intensive (5) and now we have dropped into the lottery (1). This whole deal seems to suggest that the DNR either really has no idea what the real deer numbers are or they have a strategy in mind that they don't like to tell us up front. I think that Lou drank the Kool Aid and has bitten on the big bucks are the only thing worth hunting trend. Maybe next year we will be like the bear hunters and be lucky to get drawn for a tag at all. Not sure where this whole big buck craze is going but I'm sure you'll be able to watch all about it on the hunting channel brought to you by your favorite professional hunter!!!!

[bottom-bouncer]

Just curious as to wich one of the special regulations affect the area that you hunt? because I am pretty sure that the area of the state that is affected by the speciall reg's regarding bucks is no were near sartell. But also the areas affected by the new regulations are still largely management and intensive. Let me ask you is it possible that the harvest was higher than anticapated in the previous years or maybe winter kill played small role in the recent changes. Oh and that kool-aid its very very good!

[motley man]

They gave out way to many tags with the result being to many deer shot. Now they are trying to fix a mistake. Giving 4 tags per person was a joke. If 4 hunter's shoot 4 deer on 40 acres they kill a whole herd, so now we don't see many deer at all. Great job D.N.R. Same as putting fish in lakes that don't have that species in it.

[bottom-bouncer]

I understand what your saying motley. just dont understand what lou and big bucks have to do with it.

[NoWiser]

I hunt public land northern Minnesota and yes, the zone changes almost yearly. I couldn't be happier with the hunting though. I think the DNR is doing a great job. It went to lottery this year for the first time in many, many years and I am fine with that. I'm sure if we get an easy winter this year, it will be back to managed next fall.

Funny thing I've noticed.......in our group, the same people that are whining the most about it going back to lottery are the exact same that mow down every deer they see and just keep buying tags if they are available. Just because the limit might be 2 or 5 doesn't mean you HAVE to shoot that many.

I hope Lou maybe drank a tiny bit of that Kool-aid!! Even if diluted a bit. And the comment about regular people not having places to hunt if we get more big bucks.....now thats good stuff. Its a nice try at finding an excuse not to change. Can't and won't happen in 95% of this state. Not sure what that has to do with zones going from intensive to managed to lottery, either.

[mrklean]

ours was intensive nows its managed the past few years, more then anything the weather and crops have affected the state and the number of deer we have been seeing, if its not a wet fall i see a really good deer season coming up

[BLACKJACK]

Just wondering if others are having the same crazy ups and downs as our hunting camp is having with Lou Cornicelli's management plan. Four years ago we were intensive plus a early doe season (7), then we dropped the next year to managed (2), then back to intensive (5) and now we have dropped into the lottery (1). This whole deal seems to suggest that the DNR either really has no idea what the real deer numbers are or they have a strategy in mind that they don't like to tell us up front. I think that Lou drank the Kool Aid and has bitten on the big bucks are the only thing worth hunting trend. Maybe next year we will be like the bear hunters and be lucky to get drawn for a tag at all. Not sure where this whole big buck craze is going but I'm sure you'll be able to watch all about it on the hunting channel brought to you by your favorite professional hunter!!!!

It would be interesting to get more detailed info on the individual zones and the deer counts in those zones and the reasoning why it has been designated lottery, management, or intensive. I know that I personally see lots of deer around my area and don't understand why its still a lottery zone.

As far as your complaint about the big buck management, its the old 'squeaky wheel gets the grease' theory. Hunters nowadays want to take the easy way out, lets make the DNR tie a big buck to every tree, instead of having to go out and scout, find, and harvest a big buck using their own skills. Thats too much work.

[Jameson]

...And the comment about regular people not having places to hunt if we get more big bucks.....

[Jameson]

...It would be interesting to get more detailed info on the individual zones and the deer counts in those zones and the reasoning why it has been designated lottery, management, or intensive. I know that I personally see lots of deer around my area and don't understand why its still a lottery zone....

THAT info would be great!

I too hunt where I don't think it should be lottery this year. I have thought about putting in a call to the DNR to try and get a better understanding how that decision is made, and if I or anyone else could influence a change in the future.

[hockeybc69]

Lots of maps at this location:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/deer/index.html

Here is a prefawn density map, but from 2009. Nothing for 2010 is online yet.

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/outdoor_activities/hunting/deer/deer_density_prefawn_2009.pdf

[UNDBowhunter]

I can understand both the sides of the argument... I feel the same frustration as other people with having a lot of Northern MN going to lottery area. My feeling is that most of these areas should have never had a 5 deer intensive limit for multiple years (I never like the 5 deer limit since its legal to party hunt).... And then all of sudden it goes to a lottery area. This in my mind is mismanagement especially when there hasn't been really a severe winter since '96,'97, and '98. There should be more of a gradual decline in harvest. I think it should have been managed (2 deer/year) and let nature takes its course~

It is a little frustrating when you have to look at the rule book every time you cross a highway to see what you can or can't shoot. Its almost as bad as going to a different lake and taking a pen, paper, and ruler and writing down how many fish, size, and species you can keep per lake. I understand the need to "micro manage" different areas, but more standardization is needed.

With that said, I like that the MN DNR is listening to the concerns of the hunters more than ever before....and the idea that MN can produce more mature deer. They (DNR) seem to be more progressive with the deer hunting regs in recent years, but more standardization is a must! I could keep going with my opinions and thoughts, but I think I have over ranted already.

[Bear55]

I think the DNR has just done ok, they have a hard job to do and I think they did their best with what info they had and hopefully have even more info for the future. I really believe they were learning on the job over the past decade, the state has never had a deer population that large before so its not a surprise to see some of the population swings in some areas of the state.

For example the area I rifle hunt has about 6000 hunters, back in 01-02 I think we were still Lotto with around 2500-3000 doe permits those years, we then moved to a Managed area, this was probably the right move at the time. Then we stayed a managed are for 5-6 years and this led to a huge crash in the deer population. Last year we moved to a lotto with 500 doe permits, this year the same but with only 100 do permits. This is all based off memory but I think my numbers are fairly close. To me its pretty easy to see we shot too many does for too long of a time, I can't see the 100 doe permits for 6000 hunters in the management plan. I think the DNR may have hinted at some hard winters but really we haven't had a real hard winter since the late 90's.

If you don't hunt one of these areas you might think the DNR is doing the greatest job on earth and maybe they are in your area but probably not state wide. I can only hope they are always learning and tweeking their management plan and I honestly think they are. They obviously see harvest numbers down in my area and by only allowing 100 doe permits they are showing me they want to build the population back up. Now what the do over the next 10 years will tell me if they learned anything from the past or not.

[Wobbler]

I have read all these posts and I do hunt the NE part of the state and it is big woods. Our hunting area was lottery last year and managed this year. I hunt both private and public land and I think the past 4 years we have seen more deer then ever before. I know the DNR comes out and says you can shoot 5 deer, 2 deer, etc. But management in your hunting area needs to come from you and your hunting group not the DNR! We made a plan (Our hunting group) to only shoot mature bucks and let does walk during management years and lottery years. While I could have shot numerous deer and looked like in some eyes the "best hunter" dropping everything we felt if we managed our area we can have a huge impact on our hunting. Last 4 years 4 of us shot bucks 8 points or better and our deer sightings way up! We can all point fingers at the DNR but our hunting group manages our hunting land and we could not be happier!

[UNDBowhunter]

Its good to hear that your hunting group has its own management plan, and that you are passing small bucks (more people need to do this) but I assume you are hunting private land.....

I think when the intensive harvest first came out....alot of people shot a lot of deer (the idea of posting a new speed limit on a road)....and more recently (last two years) that there is no need to shoot 5/deer per person although it would be legal.....

Again, just my two cents

[Bear55]

Wobbler that is great idea in theory and can work great if you can get everyone to agree on a plan and have a workable area without much pressure and neighbors who also want to cooperate but its not going to work in every shack or area across the northeast.

I actually do agree with what you are saying, I just don't think its possible for everyone to manage themselves. Yes some people can but most can't. Even when things were good up where I hunt I just knew I should let the does walk and I did only shooting 1 doe up there in the past 10 years when I could have literally shot dozens over that time.

Honestly what would you if you had a large group of hunters (14 in our case) and 4 of them do pass on deer but everyone else is just happy to shoot whatever they see. I basically depend on the DNR to manage the population because I don't really have a choice. That is just our group, there are also 40-50 neighboring hunters in our area. I have talked to them all but only 8 or 9 of us are willing to pass up deer.

[FishingWebGuy]

I wonder what effect it will have on an area like 177 when you place 1 intensive area in the middle of many lottery areas.

Will that area attract many more hunters than previous years? I could see most of the state land in that area being driven multiple times throughout the season if hunters "cross the road" to fill more tags.

It just seems strange having a green island surrounded by blue on the map. Seems like micro managing instead of regional managing. If the neighboring herds are hurting, why can you shoot 5 does right across the street?

It'll be interesting if 177 is lotto next year.

[mrklean]

pretty much any public land gets driven multiple times thoughout the seaon i dont see more people trying to go to different zones for more deer

[Wobbler]

My area 122 is in the Superior National Forest. While we own 70 acres in the forest I strictly hunt public land unless it is raining which I have an enclosed stand on the private land. We have neighbors who shoot everything they see but we also have 2 groups like us who use the 8 points or better measurement like us to shoot deer and do not shoot does. We used to hunt all public land for 25 years but recently bought a small chunk to have as ours. So it does work on public land to let deer go. Yes others can shoot the deer we let go but I also hunt in wolf country too and saw 2 different packs last year deer hunting yet also saw more deer then ever before. I know the DNR manages all of the state but each area within the permit area is different as well. IMHO the reason we see more deer and our bucks are better then most is we let them grow up and be at least a 3 and 1/2 year old deer and we see more does because we don't shoot them.

[germanshorthairs]

I've hunted Itasca state park and its surrounding area 184 for years. 184 now went back to lottery. Yet Itasca is still 5??? and trust me there are more wolves in Itasca then deer. I personally believe that NO WHERE in minnesota should u ever be able to shoot 5 deer. ridiculous!!!! Also an early anterless is absurd-it wrecks opening weekend and is usually hot and I imagine some venison gets wasted because of this. I know the DNR has tough choices but 5 deer and early anterless hunts??????? Does not seem smart or educated to me. Also, I wish the DNR would make it mandatory to register your deer right away, in the area you shot it, and also the store clerk come out to verify it. To me that is why there numbers are all off-it is too easy for people to cheat the system and get away with it. I heard that you can now register a deer online???????

[haverhunting]

And by phone. I do agree that the store clerk needs to see the animal to register it. As far as anearly anterless season, save that one for the geese.

[Scott M]

Thank God I found this thread so the state can hire one of you for deer management....apply here: Big Game Coordinator

[monstermoose78]

Thanks Da chise for the job posting. I applied for that job!

[Bear55]

Thank God I found this thread so the state can hire one of you for deer management....apply here: Big Game Coordinator

Sweet!!! I would apply but they would never hire me, I'm both over and under qualified for the job.

[Musky Buck]

I agree I want no part of keeping happy 500,000 deer hunters. 100,000+ bow hunters, the usual 478,000 rifle season, is it like 60,000 musket hunters. Subdivided lands with people worried more about what other hunters are doing in the area than themselves. Many avenue's to grumble grumble grumble. We are overpopulated with deer hunters in many areas, but that's what my dad told me 25 years ago would happen, best of luck to the DNR.

[Jameson]

Would love to see the applications and who they end up hiring.