Call to Action: It's Time For a National Whitetail Association

[smsmith]

I agree 100%. Yet there is a group of deer hunters who care more about the number of points on the head than the meat they get from the animal and they are proposing rules that would inhibit other hunters ability to do just that and there is also a contingent that is going after the camaraderie by lobbying to ban party hunting.

Funny how the things that I have been chastised for supporting on this forum and the very two you use as an example of our constitutional rights.

PF...I'll try to avoid another pi$$ing match with you

Camaraderie of hunters doesn't equate to me shooting somebody else's deer or vice versa IMHO. It does equate to perhaps seeing folks that you may not see frequently throughout the year. It does equate to sitting around at the end of the day, sharing what we saw and shooting the bull about years gone by. It does equate to eating food that we maybe shouldn't...and "sharing" the results of that food with others

On your APR comment...no organized group is pushing an expansion of them any time soon. Given the current deer herd we're dealing with in many areas, there simply wouldn't be the support necessary to expand them. Also, given that CWD was just found in IA...it wouldn't amaze me if there were a reduction in the number of APR units in the future IF (big if) CWD crosses into MN in the SE corner.

[BLACKJACK]

Waaaa, I want a big rack and I shouldn't have to go out in some deep dark icky scary swamp and have to "Hunt" for one!

"Like"

[picksbigwagon]

considering the CWD found in NE Iowa was near my hometown, Waukon, I think it will be crossing the border soon. Granted, the deer was shot near Harpers Ferry, which is 30 miles from the border, the fact that it is "across the river now" should indicate to the DNR that maybe APR in the SE corner of MN is not the best idea. Unfortunately, the MN DNR has shown that once CWD is found in an area, all deer are eliminated. Keeping regulations that increase population will seem counter productive in those areas.

[smsmith]

MN DNR's response to CWD (if it happens) will be interesting. Drastic herd reductions have been shown to have little impact on disease rates. WI has apparently decided to find a "carrot" approach via the new bonus buck program. That type of program would not be good news for the guys in the SE who've been focusing on improving buck age structure.

It does appear to make sense from a disease spread viewpoint to target bucks over 1.5 years of age as a CWD management tool. Those animals have the highest incidences of disease (by far) and are the most likely to spread the disease to new areas via their "wanderings" during the rut.

Guys in the SE better stay on top of things...I'd guess big changes will come if CWD shows up down there

[SmellEsox]

The area manager in my area (Little Falls) has stated that his primary goal is to keep the population at established population goal levels in his permit areas. So population control is his primary objective. However, if population control were DNR Wildlife's ONLY goal, they would not have a public input process to establish said population goals. IMO, if there was no public input process, our deer population goals and current populations would be lower than they are now.

[smsmith]

The area manager in my area (Little Falls) has stated that his primary goal is to keep the population at established population goal levels in his permit areas. So population control is his primary objective.

Beau's gotta go

He's not only managing to keep populations at goals established by the public stakeholder teams....he's managing them at 10% below what those teams established.

A betrayal of the public trust if you ask me.

[PurpleFloyd]

I agree 100%. Yet there is a group of deer hunters who care more about the number of points on the head than the meat they get from the animal and they are proposing rules that would inhibit other hunters ability to do just that and there is also a contingent that is going after the camaraderie by lobbying to ban party hunting.

Funny how the things that I have been chastised for supporting on this forum and the very two you use as an example of our constitutional rights.

[smsmith]

The thing is,there are different traditions that are practiced and enjoyed by diverse hunting groups across the state and what may not seem important to you may be very important to others.

And there is no reason to bring up any type of urination match. As ling as hunters have ooen minds and understand we are a diverse group then healthy discussions are more helpful than hurtful.

Fair enough. One of my buddies who lives and hunts about 40 minutes east of me is strongly for party hunting/crosstagging. While we disagree on that particular issue...we are able to set aside that difference. We have more in common than not.

[Old Dewjabber]

The reason we're allowed to hunt deer? IMHO because its a God given right. That right is based on a tradition of doing so, that tradition is based on two things (again...IMHO) the acquisition of food and the camaraderie of hunters.