MDHA/MN DNR listening sessions

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

Hockey, where were you when I needed you? Remember this from 2 years ago?

I do apologize.... I forgot all about that.

[SmellEsox]

I know you didn't do the math regarding your 33% claim, but check it anyway. 19% of antlerless deer harvested are males, not 33%. I know 33% sounds so much better, but it's simply not true. The numbers you're looking for are in table 17 on the harvest reports.

21-24% around Little Falls. Fawn harvest as a proportion of antlerless harvest ranged from 37% to 44% in the zones surrounding Little Falls.

[DaveT]

I do apologize.... I forgot all about that.

Just having fun with you.

[chevyracin8k]

How was the meeting in Virginia last night? Had to work, so couldn't make it.

[hockeybc69]

Mark Johnson(MDHA) posted on the QDMA forums last week about his disappointment of attendance at the Morris, MN meeting

His quote about the Morris meeting:

"Although it was a good crowd and a unified crowd, it could definitely have been bigger. Many hunters are not willing to take the time to attend, and that is a shame."

They have 6 meetings statewide and he takes a swing at hunters.

Apparently people are expected to drop everything in their lives to attend the one meeting that is in there "area".... which could be a couple hour drive one way to the closest meeting available to them.

Secondly, how many of the 500,000 deer hunters in MN even know these meetings are taking place?

Regarding your question about the Virgina, MN meeting I am curious myself to hear how it went.

[nonteepical]

If johnson had an ounce of intelligence he would have had the rooms filled at every session with the local MDHA chapter members, instead there was one local mdha guy wanting to repeal APR's in zone 3, because of all the dead bucks being found that didn't meet 4 points on one side LOL. Seen Gino shaking his head while that guy was talking.

[SmellEsox]

These listening sessions were poorly advertised. I got my e-mail alert after the two in my area were done. I'm from Little Falls, so went to the Brainerd meeting 1/2 hour away. It wasn't about the LF area. I had to go 1 1/2 hours to Cambridge to hear about LF. How were we supposed to know which meeting to go to? My local paper had no advertising in it for the meetings so the casual deer hunter was uninformed. The only folks who showed up were probably guys that live and breathe deer hunting year around. If they are gauging disdain by meeting attendance, that will be bad. At least most everyone at the meetings are giving negative comments. Hopefully they are getting a lot of online comment.

[winterwalleye]

Should have these meetings on weekends I'm sure attendance would be much better. Maybe the DNR doesn't want a lot of people at these meetings so they can say people aren't disappointed in the last few years of the deer hunting or they would attend these meetings.

[BuckSutherland]

Should have these meetings on weekends I'm sure attendance would be much better. Maybe the DNR doesn't want a lot of people at these meetings so they can say people aren't disappointed in the last few years of the deer hunting or they would attend these meetings.

This....

That was one of the main points in my letters and emails to the DNR, and to my State Representatives. Why not have a meeting or two on a weekend in the metro, St Cloud, or Mankato. It was completely ridiculous with the times, and locations of the meetings to expect any type of stellar turnout.

I heard back from my reps down south here, but didnt hear squat back from Rep Anzlec and Senator Saxhaug who represent the area where we own land. They will be hearing from me on the telephone and email again real soon. I urge the rest of you to contact your reps. If you need help figuring out who your rep is PM me with your town and I will get it for you.

[rkhinrichs]

as deer hunters we need to come together. Too many groups trying to push their own agenda. We will get nothing done this way and the DNR probably wants it this way. if we come together we can apply more pressure.

[hockeybc69]

I have emailed Tom Landwehr, Paul Telander, Leslie McInenly, Ed Boggess,,,, to name a few.

I simply asked how they plan to gather deer hunter sentiment in a way that can be measured.

We can all email, call, write letters, attend meetings; but when the day is done what do they have to measure specific areas of concern? All they have is a pile of letters, notes, and its spread across dozens and dozens and dozens of people in all of the DNR management.

I firmly believe the DNR doesnt want to know or acknowledge hunter satisfaction in a way that can be measured and reported.

As it stands today, all they can say is we heard from a bunch of people that have problems, but there are 480,000 other deer hunters out there that are not complaining.... Or whatever the number would be.

Give us a deer hunter satisfaction survey that EVERY hunter can answer.

Very very simple..... When you go to buy your deer license, ask questions just like the ELS agents do when you buy your small game licenses every year.

That will give them a very clear and concise data collection that can be tallied and reported with very little work on their part.

[Spike76]

I agree hockeybc69. I think the DNR has their own agenda. Hopefully they will do what is best for all. I think Minnesota's game and fish laws must be science based for healthy and sustainable populations. Special interest groups should not be changing what is best for all.

[winterwalleye]

I also agree hockeybc69 that way all hunters could give them their input for their area but that would be too easy for the DNR.

[MahtowaDave]

Exactly! I think that would be a great way to collect relevant, timely and area specific data.

If Hockeybc69 doesnt mind me stealing his thunder a bit, I would like share a likely sample of the DNR survey:

1.) Did your 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 deer seasons stink as bad as 2008 or did you actually see one small fawn pass through the beam of your headlights as it crossed a road on the 250 mile trek to your hunting area?

2.) Did you consider the sight of one whitetail fawn, in 250 miles, while seated in your vehicle, traveling at 60 mph, after dark, a satisfactory season?

3.) What deer area were you in when you saw said whitetail fawn?

4.) Do you feel that this area warrants an additional 7-10 years of the current practice of intensive harvest (5 deer per hunter) given the gross overpopulation that you described above?

5.) Whitetail deer are no longer native to this state so is it possible that a mule deer fawn from the black hills may have traveled across said road as we are unaware of a breeding population of whitetail deer native to this area?

5) Do you have a trail camera photo of said animal so that we can rule out the possibility that the animal that was reportedly seen, was a whitetail deer?

6.) In the 3000 hours that you spent hunting in an actual deer stand during this past season, did you see anything even remotely resembling the creature that you have described above?

7.) Do you feel that weather was the sole factor in a deer never moving within a 250 mile radius of your deer stand during the previous 5 seasons?

Thank you for your comments and valuable contributions to our survey. Your observations and ideas are very important to our goals and are a vital part of the mission of maintaining a viable resource for the hunters whose contributions FEED OUR FAMILIES. The DNR will collect and review all information and make appropriate adjustments every other DECADE to ensure the continued vitality of our fine states whitetail population.

[MahtowaDave]

I Just read in bowhunter magazine that Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and Ohio are severely limiting or even eliminating doe permits this fall due to winter die-off. I'm guessing we didn't fare any better than they did, so I expect the same here. I hope the Mn. DNR is listening in their listening sessions! While the DNR could not predict the tough winters and I would never hold them to that, they are responsible for acting quickly and comprehensively to the current situation. Act now and rebuild the herd! Bucks only in most areas. If management permits are available in areas where deer numbers are obviously lacking, my hunting group would support applying for them and eating the antlerless permit instead of using it this year. We will happily contribute the money for a management permit, but we will let the does walk. Better yet, the DNR should offer a 14 dollar tag to contribute to habitat and let them walk. They get the money, we get our deer back.

[BuckSutherland]

The hell with them a-holes and giving them more money. They need to just get a clue and shut it down to ANY doe hunting. Personally I think there should be a lottery to do any type of deer hunting east of 71 and north of 210 where the deer got hit the hardest. I will do a lot more with $14 than they will. They will blow it on lobster tails at the Breezy Point conference to decide how they are going manipulate the numbers.

No more of this bull giving bow hunters a pass on harvesting whatever they feel like, and its time to make an example of some poachers and get serious about reducing the wolves. Deer hunting pays a lot of bills in this state. I hope they maybe even over react to protect it for the future. I will gladly give up this year and maybe even next if it helps them repopulate.

And then there is this dude.

Walking on the only trail a deer made through my woods during March. He was about 10 mins behind. I have tried the law, I have talked to the owner, the neighbor has talked to the owner. We have seen him chase deer several times. No more law, no more talking.

[chevyracin8k]

That dog would be floating down a river somewhere.

[DaveT]

Not saying how I might handle this situation or how I have handled this situation in the past, but...I know I would never talk about my intentions or results on a public internet forum. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I would delete that post and refrain from making similar ones in the future.

[laker1]

You talk about low attendance at DNR meeting. Been going to meetings for the outdoors for 50 years,and most people complain in the cafe or at work,but very very few have attended a single meeting in their life. It takes to much time away from their TV show in the evening.

Seriously many past DNR meeting even with a lot of advertising you may get 12 people. Nothing changed.

The DNR already has got the message and changes will be coming. My only wish is they would look into different modeling techniques,especially in the northern half of the state.

I complain as much as anybody,but deer hunting this last 20 years can't get much better. Now were down and it is time to rebuild.