Lowering our Low Expectations

[PurpleFloyd]

So you see no difference in people trying to ban hunting all together vs. managing a recource. thats uneducated hunter mentality right there.

Well, It's good to see you make sure to post with class when debating fellow hunters who may not see things the same as you do. It really does wonders for helping others see your point of view. And as long as we are talking about being educated it is spelled resource and that's has an apostrophe. But I digress.

If you fail to understand that making it legal to shoot a deer with 7 points but not with 8 isn't really managing a resource for any biologically sound reason but rather for personal satisfaction reasons then I would look very hard in the mirror next time one steps in front of you.

[PurpleFloyd]

Now add: Wild game does not belong to the property owner - game is a public resource.

Bingo- Thanks for taking the pitch. Now quit carping about the guy who shoots the deer this year that you wanted to shoot next year. Next.

[slimngrizzly]

Take for instance if you owned a cabin on a lake and the fishing was great but then something happened and the fishing was at its worst. would you go to another lake to fish or float around searching for fish that you know are not there?

I know its maybe a bad analogy ,but its really not a bad analogy.

This is not a bad analogy at all and I think you are very correct.... BUT if the lake isn't producing because of factors like no natural reproduction, poor water quality, stocking efforts aren't taking, etc. then we really cant complain... HOWEVER if the fishing is no longer good, and you need to find another lake, because the game laws allowed the overharvest of all the fish.... then I think you have a right to be a little upset at the mismanagement that caused the problem!

If they lowered the fish limits to prevent overharvest I bet youd be ok with it... but do it with a deer and OH GEEZ, "but its LEGAL", "dont limit our opportunities", its tradition!

Manage, no matter what it takes, for a diverse age population. It can be a win-win for everyone.

Gordie, I know you love those big cats... Truth, you love getting them big sturgeon... I dont blame you! But what if everyone started to take to all the small ones and you never really caught any anymore because THEY WERENT THERE! Would you be upset that the agency who manages the resource let it come to that? I KNOW YOU WOULD.... AND YOU SHOULD!

I guess thats how it is to me... Im not trying to be a complainer about how bad MN is... im trying to express how GREAT I know it could be!! If you think its good now, IMAGINE IT EVEN BETTER!

[Wanderer]

+1 Slim.

Bingo- Thanks for taking the pitch. Now quit carping about the guy who shoots the deer this year that you wanted to shoot next year. Next.

Taking the pitch? Nice try. I am carping about the guy who over shoots the herd like they're riding a train through a herd of buffalo. How many times do we have to learn that lesson?

I'll say again, I'm less Pro-APR than I am Anti-Anti-APR. What I really am is Pro-Management for better outcomes. And yeah, that means not having a Voruca Salt attitude about public resources.

I DO believe Sportsmen were the first true conservationists and the future is in our hands. Moderation and sustainability will benefit everyone in the long run. It's like saving for retirement.

I'm done with my Honey Nut Cheerios now and am off to work - its as much time as I'm willing to waste on this anymore. Go ahead and bash my views all you want while trying win this unwinnable argument. As long as you feel good about it, thats all that matters.

[Gordie]

Manage, no matter what it takes, for a diverse age population. It can be a win-win for everyone.

The problem with this is everyone has a different idea on how to manage and no matter what how its done or not done not everyone will be happy. So its not always a win, win for everyone.

[JIvers]

The problem with this is everyone has a different idea on how to manage and no matter what how its done or not done not everyone will be happy. So its not always a win, win for everyone.

Again, this.

One example of why this debate will never end is because there is no way "meat-hunters" and grain farmers--who, like it or not, also have a say in this discussion--will ever agree on the proper number of deer in any agricultural area.

[MUSKY18]

Here is a good article from a couple years back, but given the situation of deer hunting in MN, I doubt that any of this information has changed that much.

MN Deer Hunting

Lots of interesting facts, such as 87 percent of bucks in MN never make it past 2 1/2 years old. Only 2.5% of hunters are from out state. Compare that to Iowa which is at 19%That right there means Minnesotans are destroying Minnesotas deer herd. Although the article is written about the economical effects, it hits a lot of good points.

My carpool buddy was telling me on the way to work this morning that he was in a wedding with a guy who lives in South Central MN. So far this year, his party has shot 29 deer and are planning on taking more during the muzzy season. Their goal is to wipe out as many deer as possible cause they eat his corn fields. That mentality is no worse than herding them up to take to a slaughter house. Just plain stupid in my opinion.

[TruthWalleyes]

Nonteepical reminds me of a lake minnetonka lakeshore owner in the summer.

....Now i get why you are so into APR, you can't seem to take a step off your 100 acres, which is probably bad land anyway. I can't help but laugh thinking of you sitting on your 100 each and every year, grinding your teeth together everytime you hear a neighbor shoot.

Have you thought about building a high fence and making your own herd of superior deer? Maybe there is a government grant for horn porn.

[TRZ II]

I just want to know when did everyone have an easy time shooting a mature buck??? The 50's or 60's or earlier? You guys must be really old! The early 00's were great hunting years for does and spikes and "meat" it was easy to shoot deer but still very difficult to shoot mature trophy bucks. I have been able to shoot a very nice mature buck 3 of the past 4 years because I'm a much better hunter than I was 10 years ago. I hunt the same areas and never even seen mature bucks in the "hayday" of MN hunting. Get out and hunt! Learn the sport and you will get nicer bucks, they are there!

[PurpleFloyd]

Take for instance if you owned a cabin on a lake and the fishing was great but then something happened and the fishing was at its worst. would you go to another lake to fish or float around searching for fish that you know are not there?

I know its maybe a bad analogy ,but its really not a bad analogy.

[PurpleFloyd]

Taking the pitch? Nice try. I am carping about the guy who over shoots the herd like they're riding a train through a herd of buffalo. How many times do we have to learn that lesson?

I'll say again, I'm less Pro-APR than I am Anti-Anti-APR. What I really am is Pro-Management for better outcomes. And yeah, that means not having a Voruca Salt attitude about public resources.

I DO believe Sportsmen were the first true conservationists and the future is in our hands. Moderation and sustainability will benefit everyone in the long run. It's like saving for retirement.

I understand that point and if that is really your goal then I have no problem with it. If they are getting that hammered then would you be on board with the DNR closing areas that have too few deer to hunting period until they rebound? And when they open if the manage bucks are you OK with putting a limit on the TOTAL number of bucks harvested to control the population and not just on the size of the rack to cater to a segment that wants it easier to shoot a trophy? because that is something that would make sense if the numbers are too low.

[Jameson]

...If you fail to understand that making it legal to shoot a deer with 7 points but not with 8 isn't really managing a resource for any biologically sound reason but rather for personal satisfaction reasons then I would look very hard in the mirror next time one steps in front of you.

In your small vacuum of a world their are two bucks then, one 7 pointers, one 8 pointer. A)If the hunter shoots the 8, that leaves the 7 to live on. B)If the hunter shoots the 7, that leaves the 8 to live on. C) If both bucks get shot, the only bucks around next year will be new ones.

Rank them. What scenario puts the deer herd in the best shape for next year. Please don't include the hunter's opinion in this. It is simply a biological question, not a social one. BAC? We currently have C. Settling for A is still seen as a biological improvement.

[Jameson]

I understand that point and if that is really your goal then I have no problem with it. If they are getting that hammered then would you be on board with the DNR closing areas that have too few deer to hunting period until they rebound? And when they open if the manage bucks are you OK with putting a limit on the TOTAL number of bucks harvested to control the population and not just on the size of the rack to cater to a segment that wants it easier to shoot a trophy? because that is something that would make sense if the numbers are too low.

I would be. But you have got to get the ag folks to go along with it.

[mntatonka]

I would be. But you have got to get the ag folks to go along with it.

So now you want the farmers livelihood to suffer so you can have an easier time shooting deer?

[TruthWalleyes]

We currently have C.

Yet big deer are shot every year. Amazing.

[PurpleFloyd]

Here is a good article from a couple years back, but given the situation of deer hunting in MN, I doubt that any of this information has changed that much.

MN Deer Hunting

Lots of interesting facts, such as 87 percent of bucks in MN never make it past 2 1/2 years old. Only 2.5% of hunters are from out state. Compare that to Iowa which is at 19%That right there means Minnesotans are destroying Minnesotas deer herd. Although the article is written about the economical effects, it hits a lot of good points.

My carpool buddy was telling me on the way to work this morning that he was in a wedding with a guy who lives in South Central MN. So far this year, his party has shot 29 deer and are planning on taking more during the muzzy season. Their goal is to wipe out as many deer as possible cause they eat his corn fields. That mentality is no worse than herding them up to take to a slaughter house. Just plain stupid in my opinion.

APR's don't fix that because a 2.5 YO deer will except for isolated cases meet the point total and they will just wipe out all of the 2.5 year olds instead of the 1.5 year olds and the same number of 3 year old and up deer will remain.

[B. Amish]

Yet big deer are shot every year. Amazing.

+4968

[B. Amish]

APR's don't fix that because a 2.5 YO deer will except for isolated cases meet the point total and they will just wipe out all of the 2.5 year olds instead of the 1.5 year olds and the same number of 3 year old and up deer will remain.

let's not kid ourselves either. 110-140" bucks will eventually bore the apr guys. what they'll want next is for people to pass the 150" so they can have a shot at a booner.

[MUSKY18]

If the day ever comes in MN when we are all getting bored by seeing 140" deer, then some type of program would have been instituted to bring our herd back to where it has the potential to be at.

I'd also be willing to bet that if there were 140" deer running all over the state, this discussion probably wouldn't be happening.

[Gordie]

If the day ever comes in MN when we are all getting bored by seeing 140" deer, then some type of program would have been instituted to bring our herd back to where it has the potential to be at.

I'd also be willing to bet that if there were 140" deer running all over the state, this discussion probably wouldn't be happening.

I bet it would because to many of them would be shot and not everyone would fill a tag.

Yes we have a lot of hunters and if everyone tags out guess what NO more deer. someone has to not fill a tag that a fact it happens. yet each and every year this debate goes on the herd is being destroyed so lets manage for a mature bucks, age class what ever you want to call it. Someone will ALWAYS NOT be happy with the outcome period.

Big is better mentality is media driven and if you don't believe that then why do have high fence hunting so some so called sportsmen can hang a trophy on the wall.

I had enough of this and tried of the picture always being painted black time to add some color and I think I'll start with the color red.

[flipper]

I for the life of me cannot figure out what makes some think all people in Minnesota should manage their farms and their wooded land so that the deer herd is where some fanatics think it ought to be. (and then they call people "stupid" who don't agree with them).

Some story about a hunting party who shot 29 deer in south central Minnesota! (and they can't wait until muzzie season to get many more)Must be some huge hunting party since the limit here in south central is 1 deer.

I like deer and I like hunting them but I also realize how destructive these "corn rats" can be both on agriculture and our limited woodlots. Deer are very adaptable to man, that's why there are more deer in Minnesota now then there were 30, 40, or 100 years ago.

The challenge the DNR has is to strike a balance between the desires of the hunters and the needs of the farmers and others. I really don't think the job they are doing is as bad as many of you disgruntled hunters think. If anything they are caving in too much to the horn porn guys the way it is.

[mntatonka]

Lots of interesting facts, such as 87 percent of bucks in MN never make it past 2 1/2 years old. Only 2.5% of hunters are from out state. Compare that to Iowa which is at 19%That right there means Minnesotans are destroying Minnesotas deer herd. Although the article is written about the economical effects, it hits a lot of good points.

There is not, and never has been, any data that backs up the claim that a majority of any class bucks are getting shot. The ONLY data ever taken was from a state park hunt with limited participants.

As for wanting more out of state hunters, the question I have is why? So many people here are complaining we don't have enough deer, and you want to bring more hunters in from out of state to hunt the already overhunted public lands? That makes perfect sense!

[mntatonka]

I for the life of me cannot figure out what makes some think all people in Minnesota should manage their farms and their wooded land so that the deer herd is where some fanatics think it ought to be. (and then they call people "stupid" who don't agree with them).

Some story about a hunting party who shot 29 deer in south central Minnesota! (and they can't wait until muzzie season to get many more)Must be some huge hunting party since the limit here in south central is 1 deer.

I like deer and I like hunting them but I also realize how destructive these "corn rats" can be both on agriculture and our limited woodlots. Deer are very adaptable to man, that's why there are more deer in Minnesota now then there were 30, 40, or 100 years ago.

The challenge the DNR has is to strike a balance between the desires of the hunters and the needs of the farmers and others. I really don't think the job they are doing is as bad as many of you disgruntled hunters think.

It's entirely possible they have crop damage tags, in which case they have a legitimate reason to significantly reduce the herd in that area.

[Bear55]

I do everything i can on my 100 acres of land to benefit wildlife,deer in particular, so when the DNR puts out to many tags for years, and uneducated (stupid)hunters kill as many deer that the DNR allows (when the deer population dosen't justify the tags) so they can "fill out", your saying I'm to blame, and i should sell my property and scout for new land and hope the neighbors are conservation minded?

What I am saying is if you aren't completely happy with your hunting situation change it, spinning your wheels hunting the same stands over and over isn't going to fix anything. Keep your land and try somewhere else for a while, it might be fun and you just might get a surprise when you get back to your land and see more deer. Biggest problem private land hunters have is they hunt their land too much, I know that is why you bought it but your not doing yourself any favors pressuring the deer. Let your neighbors do that and you might find better hunting on your 100 acres.

[walleye18]

Bear55...your right in your post.

We have private land that we hunt near the Pequot Lakes area....total of 319 acres.

Food plots and limited pressure make things interesting/good for us - and deer hunting.

Not as many deer as say 5 yrs ago due to our area being an intensive harvest area and one could take 5 deer during the gun season....some people did - and now the population is way lower.

Biggest thing we have going for us is the food source - and limited pressure. Our neighbors adjacent to our land shoot deer but really pressure their property...IMO way too hard. If its brown, its down is their mentality - and its ok. They have the right to do that.

We see more deer and bigger bucks by and large as the "girls" stay more to my place than theirs...food, security, less pressure, etc... They have no food plots and pressure the hec out of their property.

Point being, there are many factors that influence the deer population/amount of deer in a given area. One year, we had lots of deer around. It was the peak of the rut. Lots of does in estress and the bucks were all over the place. That year, we saw 11 different bucks in 4 days. Biggest was a "booner" that was later found with an arrow in it. There was only 2 of us hunting that year...my wife and me.

Just like in fishing...there are good spots that produce fish all the time - if the bait is and conditions are right....If the fishing spot gets pounded and pressured, the population goes down for that spot...its just like deer hunting. They (the deer) will be there if the food, security and needs of the animals are met.