Lowering our Low Expectations

[leechlake]

I'm looking at some more disappointed hunter reports here. Usually the disappointment is followed by trying to reason why. Windy conditions, corn not out, wolves, etc. I don't know why I have never thought of the following but I did last night.

Are there any Deer Hunting Guides or Outfitters in Minnesota north of the Twin Cities? How many are even in the state total? I've seen a few episodes of hunting shows that occurred in Minnesota. Why? Deer hunting stinks, in general.

Kansas, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Ohio, Illinois, Nebraska, Wisconsin, provinces in Canada. All of these states are "destination" hunts for people who like deer hunting. People will pay thousands to hire a guide/outfitter and go there deer hunting. Minnesota just isn't even close to be in the Major Leagues.

Don't get me wrong, I've hunted deer in Minnesota for 30 years plus and will continue to. It would just be nice to have the experience of seeing either more deer, bigger deer, whatever your desire. I'm not saying talking "trophy's" only. Everyone has a different reason to deer hunt. It would be nice if our state somehow could solve this problem. In general, most hunters see very few deer. It's depressing. I'm going to South Dakota this weekend and in three days will easily see over 100 deer, a lot of "nice" bucks, and hopefully a few really big bucks even with the EHD issues that state has had.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

Some main reasons we have fewer deer in MN:

Long, tough winters;

500,000 strong orange army;

questionable management strategies by our DNR, influenced by insurance companies to suppress the deer pop;

previously uncontrolled wolf population

[Summett]

I'm sure there are many opinions of why the #'s are low, but some of it has to be on hunting pressure from years past. Maybe...I don't know, but one would surely think.

One state that I think you may see a change in the near future is ND. With all the influx of out-of-state workers via the oil boom, I'm sure that will create an influx of hunters...at least in the western part of the state (if not overall). That may affect the deer in total.

The only + side to keeping that in check is that in ND you have to apply for a gun hunting permit in May...and the drawing takes place late summer. At least that's the way it was when i grew up and hunted there.

I wonder if MN applied that application process and if it would sway the # of hunters that get a license each year. I can tell you that those that hunted deer "on a wim"...almost always missed the application deadline.

[sticknstring]

Agreed. If you're dissatisfied with hunting in MN (you should be), you need to let the people in charge know about it. With no voice, there won't be any change. The SE part of the state has a voice. It's been heard, and has changed for the better. By better, I mean through hunter satisfaction surveys. Contact your local area wildlife managers & Leslie and let them know your opinions on deer hunting in your area. We have the habitat to support more deer. What's been successful in the SE can be expanded to more areas of the state. Why settle for mediocrity? MN has the potential - time to tap into it!

MN local area wildlife managers map and contact info

[email protected]

[LandDr]

Ha...where do you start?

1. Poor age management...bucks are not getting old enough. I don't need to go in depth into that one...we all know it.

2. Poor land management...public lands have very low carrying capacities. I was at a training one time up north given by the DNR for stewardship plan certification. The DNR teacher obviously did not like food plots because he expressed several times that deer don't need food plots to survive and you will have deer without food plots. Although this is true, he was missing the point. Yes, you will have "some" deer...but we want more deer and better deer! To get more deer and better deer, then you have to INCREASE THE CARRYING CAPACITY. That means not just having trees and grass.

3. "No money...we are broke"...that is what the public lands people will tell you. Well, there is now this little pot of cash now from increasing our sales tax. Problem is that it is very questionable how they are using that money. From what I have seen, on public hunting lands, it is being used for more trees and grass!

There was a thread a couple weeks ago discussing issues with deer that I commented on...and then the discussion stopped. My point was that each one of us has to step up to make the change.

1. Start some projects on your own or with a group.

2. Call your Rep and Sen to express your concerns and also offer some solutions (don't just complain...give them some solutions)

3. Call your local DNR and the State office...again, concerns and solutions.

4. Set your phone calendar to remind you to call each one of those contacts again each month. Squeaky hinge gets oiled.

I built my farms up based on my management techniques. I see 20-30 deer each time I am out. I usually have 12-15 bucks on 160 acres and usually 5 of them are 140+ with one over 170+. This farm did not have much when I started and I built it from there. It will take some initiative from you and some time...but it can be done.

I am sitting at my desk right now putting a plan together for a farm in Wisconsin. If the landowner(s) implement the recommendations, within a year they should see a significant increase in the "number" of deer and within 3 years they should see a significant increase in the "age" of the deer. Good stuff!!

[Deet]

MN does NOT have:

exceptional deer, duck, pheasant, turkey, grouse, bear hunting; or exceptional bass, walleye, trout, salmon, panfish, muskie fishing.

MN does have:

good opportunities for all the above sports. Some things, like muskie fishing, are arguably exceptionally good in our state.

I'm just happy that I can, with just decent effort, probably shoot a buck every year, while enjoying most of the other mentioned games as well.

Maybe I'm just content because I haven't experienced anything better. And I don't watch too many hunting shows. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

[LandDr]

I would agree with Deet...there is a good opportunity for all of that...and that is a great thing.

But...it wouldn't take much to make it that much better, regarding deer, pheasant and ducks in MN.

Here are the issues I hear...

Bad Winters...well then start implementing cover that is better designed to get wildlife thru the winter. People really need to stop thinking that cattail swamps and willows will get deer and pheasants thru the winter. It will on average winters...but they are death traps on bad winters.

Bad DNR policy...then hound them and get your groups activated. Also simply ask if you can do some projects...often they are fine with some clover, etc. or other plots. In many areas they may not have an issue with some conifer plantings as well. There is a very large amount of public land in MN...it needs some attention.

Farmers...probably not going to change ag policy, so I would recommend to work on the above items. But it wouldn't hurt to get a group together and see if they have some odd land you can do some projects on.

Wolves...got me on that one. Elk too. I know what should be done but I'm not going to admit it. Maybe if the DNR wants wolves and elk, then they should put them on their property with a high fence...why push it onto private tax paying landowners? I don't understand that one and this is not the thread for it.

Many of you have some land available...the WHIP and EQIP programs offer up to 70-75% cost share for projects if you want some financial assistance. If you have Ag land, then I have a lot of other options for you to look at.

MN has so much potential for deer, pheasant and duck...but it requires changing some ways people look at stuff.

[Getanet]

Kansas, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Ohio, Illinois, Nebraska, Wisconsin, provinces in Canada. All of these states are "destination" hunts for people who like deer hunting. People will pay thousands to hire a guide/outfitter and go there deer hunting. Minnesota just isn't even close to be in the Major Leagues.

Why do we want to replicate other states where thousands of acres of land are privatized by outfitters and the only way you can hope to access it is to pay around $6-10K to hunt the property? So we can cheer about all the "book" bucks guys are paying top dollar to shoot? So we can have a few more "hunting" shows filmed here? Yippee!

There's a place near Little Falls called Autumn Antlers. I'm sure all your wildest dreams will be fulfilled there. Here's the pricing on Whitetails, have at it:

up to 149"- $3,250

150"-159"- $3,995

160"-169"- $4,995

170"-179"- $5,995

180"-189"- $6,995

190"-199"- $8,995

200"-219"- $10,995

220"-249"- $13,995

250"-299"- $20,995

[mntatonka]

Agreed. If you're dissatisfied with hunting in MN (you should be), you need to let the people in charge know about it. With no voice, there won't be any change. The SE part of the state has a voice. It's been heard, and has changed for the better. By better, I mean through hunter satisfaction surveys. Contact your local area wildlife managers & Leslie and let them know your opinions on deer hunting in your area. We have the habitat to support more deer. What's been successful in the SE can be expanded to more areas of the state. Why settle for mediocrity? MN has the potential - time to tap into it!

MN local area wildlife managers map and contact info

[email protected]

The SE part certainly has a voice, but it's not a voice of everyone, or even a majority. The last thing most of you actually want is APR, especially in 1-deer areas.

[LandDr]

Goal is to make it "better". There is a lot of public land that everyone would benefit from...not just guides. Some private land would be used by guides...but in reality, that land is already probably not available to anyone so not sure what the difference is.

I like to see a lot of deer...my kids and I see that. I like to see bucks and maybe some bigger ones...we see that also. We like to see lots of pheasants...we see that too. We like to see ducks...so we planted wild rice, sago, celery and shrimp...I also flood some of my corn...so we have lots of ducks too.

Make it what you want it to be and what the property is capable of providing.

[Getanet]

Goal is to make it "better". There is a lot of public land that everyone would benefit from...not just guides. Some private land would be used by guides...but in reality, that land is already probably not available to anyone so not sure what the difference is.

My point was anytime I hear people reference "hunting shows" I just grind my teeth. They realize "reality shows" on network TV are far from reality. But when it comes to hunting shows they think that's what the whole state is like. At the end of 99% of any hunting show they will thank some guide or outfitter. Look up the name of that outfitter and you'll see how far from reality most hunting shows are to the average person.

[leechlake]

X out what I said about hunting shows (I hate them too and have hunted a few places while they were filming, made me hate them even more) and then let's continue the discussion. I'm not talking about killing giganto bucks every year or always waiting for a "shooter." As I said everyone has their own trophy, for me the #1 trophy is the whole deer camp thing, #2 is hunting deer. If a reasonably skilled hunter who puts some effort into it sees 0-2 deer a weekend that just isn't that much fun. I'm lucky enough to hunt in So Dak with my buddy on his families farm, it's like Minnesota deer camp that we all do. Don't pay to hunt, bring good food, have a few beers. Only thing different is that we SEE deer (and they have a hot tub!)

[mwal]

One thing to remember when you are praising the incredible deer you see on these outfitted hunts is that they severely limit how many deer are harvested and which ones are taken each year. This means they tie up thousands of acres of land and only allow the chosen few willing to pay the big money to hunt it. Look to vast areas of Illinois and Buffalo Cty WI, Look at the lands in IA that are tied up by people like Lee and Tiffany. They openly talk about how some of land only gets hunted every couple of years and only by them. No wonder giants abound. KS only has had Non resident deer hunting for a short time. Prior to that as a non resident you could not go there and hunt deer that kept the pressure way down now its getting hammered and the land is getting tied up by outfitter's trying to cash in. Ask the local hunter like my brother in-law what he thinks of outfitters. He now has very few places to hunt and is thinking about no longer deer hunting. Can you blame land owners who are offered cash to only allow a couple of people a year to hunt their land for a cash sum. That is what it takes to get the big bucks you see on TV my friend or read about in bowhunting magazines. Most of them are shot somewhere that is intensely managed and access is severely restricted. With MN unrestricted license sales and lots of public land not much can change. Are you willing to sit out seasons waiting on tags? Will you be happy with private land owners embracing getting money from outfitters and not having to deal with Joe schmo asking for permission. Or perhaps you like Canada's methods of assigning vast tracts of public land to certain outfitters to profit off of and no one else can hunt unless outfitted. Try to research doing a deer hunt up there not a cheap endeavor non resident must us outfitter's in certain area's period. Hunting for giant racks is going to ruin hunting as we know it for the average guy. The anti hunter's are secretly smiling as we begin to in fight. The tide will start to turn when you cannot defend hunting as sport and a way to manage an animals population when all the arguing is about how big the rack is. Trophy only hunting is hard to defend to a lot of non hunters. IMHO

Mwal

[nofishfisherman]

I think most hunters need to take a closer look at their own personal actions when it comes to the deer population.

Its easy to blame wolves, the DNR, or the guy baiting across the street. But when I see all the yearling does and fork bucks laying out at the butcher shops or in the back of trucks its pretty easy to see why there aren't any larger deer and why the population is in the state it is.

[leechlake]

like I posted before you posted and probably as you typed I'm not talking trophy, I'm talking mostly about seeing deer; small bucks, medium bucks, a couple big ones, does and fawns. Yes, there are examples of land hogging in certain states. Don't see much of it in South Dakota.

Why doesn't anyone do the Lee and Tiffany thing in Minnesota tying up thousand of acres or the Kansas things where outfitters are "cashing in" by offering expensive hunts and leasing thousands of acres?

[DRAGFOOT]

I think the internet is causing people to talk about it more and thats why some think deer hunting isnt so good. You always hear more bad news than good news. Most people are happy to see 2 deer in a weekend! Deer hunting in MN is pretty good but the TV shows are creating unrealistic expectations.

Also, who ever it was that said that we dont have great Walleye fishing needs to take a trip to Northern MN. Again, the TV shows are causing unrealistic expectations. The TV shows dont show/tell you about how many hours were spent when nothing was happening.

Maybe I just dont know any better. I dont claim to be a elite outdoorsman but I usually bag a deer most years and never get skunked when I go fishing unless the weather holds me back.

Its called Fishing, not catching and Hunting, not harvesting. Its not a gaurantee and the struggles make us better sportsman.

[mwal]

LeechLake,

I think part of of the leasing thing has to do with the population as well as the size of the farms etc. In Kansas for Example my brother in law tells me that many farms in the good deer areas are quite large covering thousands of acres. Some are no longer family owned so the problem lies in the fact that once family ties are being broken from the land the large farming operation's see it as just another income stream and one less thing to worry about since they would direct hunting access request to the outfitters. In MN probably the only area would be the SE area of the State and I have never researched if it has many leasing situations. I know across the River in WI In the prime counties much of the prime lands are tied up in hunting leases I fish with a guy that has some acreage in Buffalo Cty and approached all the time by outfitter's even though it is smaller in size. I am happy just hunting for deer period If i get a big one great, if a doe great just like the hunt.

Mwal

Mwal

[Getanet]

Why doesn't anyone do the Lee and Tiffany thing in Minnesota tying up thousand of acres or the Kansas things where outfitters are "cashing in" by offering expensive hunts and leasing thousands of acres?

They are. Use Google and you'll find a number of outfitters in MN. A growing number as a matter of fact.

[InTheNorthwoods]

Leasing is already happening in Minnesota on a widespread level. It just isn't as noticed as some bordering states because we have more "huntable" land in Minnesota. More public land, and more wooded land, and more "broken" sections (i.e. more 40's and 80's than 1/4's and larger). Kansas, Iowa, the Dakota's, etc. all have a much higher percentage of private land than Minnesota, not to mention they have less "huntable" acres than Minnesota (i.e. a higher percentage of farm fields).

When it comes to actual deer habitat, Minnesota and Wisconsin are about as good as it comes on a "big picture" scale. It is a fairly apples/apples comparison of ag, mixed ag, and big woods habitat. The differences between these two states are the human controlled elements.

[nonteepical]

I think most hunters need to take a closer look at their own personal actions when it comes to the deer population.

Its easy to blame wolves, the DNR, or the guy baiting across the street. But when I see all the yearling does and fork bucks laying out at the butcher shops or in the back of trucks its pretty easy to see why there aren't any larger deer and why the population is in the state it is.

This is 3/4 of the problem the other 1/4 is state deer management.

Just because the DNR has management permits and your land dosen't show the population to justify taking extra deer (or any deer at all for that matter) dosen't mean you try to fill every tag you can get your hands on and ruin your and the neighbors hunting for future seasons all because you have to fill the max amount of tags greed.

[Walleyehooker]

If they didn't grow and stock fish and have slot limits in the lakes there wouldn't be many of them either. Lot of hunters and only so many deer. Then add a few harsh winters, road kill and some wolves to reduce the numbers some more. You can always spend 1000s on some land and food plots and try to raise your own like many are already doing.

[nonteepical]

Deer hunting in MN is pretty good but the TV shows are creating unrealistic expectations.

I think if your one of these people who sit in your stand and compare what your seeing to what you watch on tv your to dangerous to even be handling a gun, your brain don't function right, it's TV, it's NOT REAL.

Comparing what other states public hunters are experiencing vs. ours, yes thats a real comparison and in Mn. we aren't doing so well.

[CANOPY SAM]

I believe Dragfoot makes a very good point. I experienced this myself on Saturday morning. I had a very respectable 8-pt buck walk right up my trail and I actually hesitated to shoot the animal cause in the back of my mind, all these TV shows were skewing my perception of what a "good" buck is. After a moments pause, and a close look at the animals age, I harvested a very nice 2 1/2 - 3 1/2 yr. old, fully mature 8-pt.

After the animal piled up in the field I walked out to field dress it and realized it was actually a very nice animal, with a respectable rack, and a good heavy body. I had to chuckle at myself as I knew I made the right decision, but in the back of my mind I was still hung up on the idea that a 170-inch giant might just come walking by.

It's just not "reality" to even hope to see a true giant in the wild. I've hunted deer for 35 years, and out of those hundreds of thousands of hours of hunting in very good areas I can easily count on one hand the number of bucks I've seen over 150 inches.

I'm not suggesting that we "Lower our already low expectations". I think that just having "reasonable, practical, realistic" expectations is more in order.

Years ago I would have been absolutely jumping out of my skin about the buck I harvested on Sat morning. Reality TV has skewed this perception. I look at it now and faintly think it's a weak example of a deer, but I know it's actually a good representation of a nice Minnesota Whitetail, and 99% of hunters out there would be more than happy to have this animal to share with others.

I think one of the truly greatest problems we have in Minnesota with growing big whitetails is the fact that even if you have 600 acres set aside for QDM "your" deer will still wander onto the neighbor's property from time to time, and they won't hesitate to kill everything they see. It likely takes a village of landowners, all with the same agenda, to make a truly respectable herd. Maybe? I don't know.

I have a good friend who owns a quarter section north of us. He gets very nice bucks on his property every year. But everyone in his town knows it as well. They surround his property every year, and he knows whenever he lets a little guy walk it's going to die as soon as it steps off his property.

[PurpleFloyd]

The success goes up and down over the years depending on habitat, weather, crop conditions and many other factors. This is no different than the Pheasant population or the populations of other species.

8 years ago we had bumper crops of pheasants and guys were coming here from all over to shoot birds and the population did just fine even with the increased harvest.

Since then we have had bad winters,bad springs and a huge loss of habitat and the numbers of birds have dropped significantly even though the pressure from out of area hunters has all but dried up.

Habitat is the single most important factor that we can control that will determine whether we have a good or bad herd. If they have habitat to breed, reproduce, survive the winter, hide from hunters and eat in the summer we will have a nice herd.

OTOH if we tile every wet spot, plow the grasslands, take out all of the abandoned groves, tree lines, buffer zones and turn them to black dirt then the population will shrink and success will be few and far between no matter how we hunt.

[PurpleFloyd]

Also, we are a small group as it stands and there are other factors outside of hunting that can also play a role.

Ask a car owner if they would rather hit a 100 pound spike buck or a 250 pound 12 pointer with their car. Ask their insurance company which they would rather have their client hit. Ask a farmer if they would rather have a larger herd of deer eating their corn and beans or a few. And ask if they would rather be feeding a 250 pound deer with their corn or a 100 pound yearling.

In any hobby/addiction/ activity there are going to be those on the forefront pushing a particular agenda and doing their best to impose their particular standards on the rest of the participants. What they are pushing is not necessarily what is best for the whole and in the end it can at times lead to negative consequences. But there will always be those in the ranks who strive to help the proponents achieve their goals and there will also be the traditionalists who just want to keep things the way they are.