MN deer hunters

[smsmith]

The DNR did not have enough information at that time so choose to lower the population to lessen potential outbreaks . There are some large risks maybe with 30 - 40 deer per square mile . Deer hunting and deer populations can effect other things not so apparent. What im trying to say is be carefull what you wish for you might get it

Interesting. I specifically asked Marrett Grund if CWD and bovine TB played a role in the last round of stakeholder meetings. He repeatedly denied that it had.

CWD doesn't "spontaneously erupt"...the prions have to come from somewhere. Many states have extremely high densities and zero evidence of CWD or bovine TB.

[mntatonka]

Current depredation tags as far as I know are only for specialty crop losses, the tags issued must be filled using copper bullets, deer must be gutted and hung, call to officer made, deer surrendered , deer is then taken to a processer , processed and distributed to food selves . policy would have to change greatly

Incorrect. We had 75 tags last year. All we had to do was give a list of names/DNR #'s of who was using the tags (up to 5 per person), and the deer had to be shot on our property. In our case, they were also required to be used during the open seasons with legal means (partly by our own request). It didn't matter what kind of bullets were used, and officers weren't involved in any way.

[PurpleFloyd]

We had 75 tags last year. (up to 5 per person)

You may want to offer some of the guys in the transitional zone over to help out.

[smsmith]

You may want to offer some of the guys in the transitional zone over to help out.

Tongue in cheek humor duly noted

Seriously, if mntatonka was going to offer somebody a chance to help out it should be somebody from the northern third of the state. Those hunters have really taken it in the shorts between over harvest and severe winters.

[PurpleFloyd]

Tongue in cheek humor duly noted

You noticed?

[mntatonka]

Tongue in cheek humor duly noted

Seriously, if mntatonka was going to offer somebody a chance to help out it should be somebody from the northern third of the state. Those hunters have really taken it in the shorts between over harvest and severe winters.

Speaking of that, we've got a few guys from Grand Rapids coming down this year, and hopefully a few more for muzzleloader season.

[smsmith]

Speaking of that, we've got a few guys from Grand Rapids coming down this year, and hopefully a few more for muzzleloader season.

Excellent to hear

[mntatonka]

Excellent to hear

Of course, most of those have been invited down for the last 10-20 years, but rarely come.

Looking at it, we've got 5-10 archery hunters, 15-30 3A hunters, 15-30 3B hunters, and who knows how many muzzleloader hunters. And that's on about 300 acres of steep wooded hills between 6 landowners (including cow pastures, which the deer don't spend much time in)

[Bear55]

Seriously, if mntatonka was going to offer somebody a chance to help out it should be somebody from the northern third of the state. Those hunters have really taken it in the shorts between over harvest and severe winters.

Don't worry we are use to it, I remember when even seeing a deer was a big deal. A couple of seasons with 10-12 hunters getting totally skunked, we just roll with it and hope to some day see double digit deer per square mile numbers again.

[SmellEsox]

Of course, most of those have been invited down for the last 10-20 years, but rarely come.

Looking at it, we've got 5-10 archery hunters, 15-30 3A hunters, 15-30 3B hunters, and who knows how many muzzleloader hunters. And that's on about 300 acres of steep wooded hills between 6 landowners (including cow pastures, which the deer don't spend much time in)

Wow, that is a lot of hunting pressure. Should keep your deer numbers down, or at least scared off the property for awhile.

[mntatonka]

Wow, that is a lot of hunting pressure. Should keep your deer numbers down, or at least scared off the property for awhile.

We scare some of them off during 3B because we do drives, but they always come back. It's pretty rare for us to not see multiple deer any time we go out, even doing the exact same drive 3 or 4 days in a row.

A lot of that is probably because we're the only ones that really push the deer. Everyone these days is so worried about "their buck", that they don't let anyone hunt their land. Other than our hunting area, there is virtually no pressure on the deer within 10 miles (other than the public land at the end of the valley, but even that isn't much).

[SmellEsox]

Wow! Virtually no pressure for 10 miles! Sounds like whitetail heaven.

[smsmith]

35-50 hunters on 300 acres...wow. A hunter every 6 - 8.5 acres and you're still killing deer. I run 2 guys on 87 acres and that's pushing it. Really have to watch access to make sure things don't get mucked up.

[mntatonka]

35-50 hunters on 300 acres...wow. A hunter every 6 - 8.5 acres and you're still killing deer. I run 2 guys on 87 acres and that's pushing it. Really have to watch access to make sure things don't get mucked up.

Now you understand when I say we have a ton of hunters that I'm not joking. 15 years ago when more groups did drives (or even hunted for that matter), we could average 2-3 deer per hunter each year. Now it's down to like 1.5 or so most years, maybe a little less. Not that the population has dropped any.

[Farmsfulltime]

Population that high across the entire area ? Or do you hunt control a micro area like maybe a few square miles in that vicinity ? What does the farm community have to say about deer feeding at those populations? Are the crop losses on some fields excessive ? Are there large bucks in the mix year to year as it sounds like its been this way for some time . Just looking at your posts it sounds as if the habitat is optimal and most of the deer use the cover where you hunt and maybe hunting on neighboring properties isn't as good which might make neighbors perceive that the population is lower than it is . Question for everyone does most of the gunfire in your hunting area come from the same general area every season , If so do you think its because those hunters will , are shooting every deer they see or is it because there are more deer on their areas. Thoughts ?

[mntatonka]

Population that high across the entire area ? Or do you hunt control a micro area like maybe a few square miles in that vicinity ? What does the farm community have to say about deer feeding at those populations? Are the crop losses on some fields excessive ? Are there large bucks in the mix year to year as it sounds like its been this way for some time . Just looking at your posts it sounds as if the habitat is optimal and most of the deer use the cover where you hunt and maybe hunting on neighboring properties isn't as good which might make neighbors perceive that the population is lower than it is . Question for everyone does most of the gunfire in your hunting area come from the same general area every season , If so do you think its because those hunters will , are shooting every deer they see or is it because there are more deer on their areas. Thoughts ?

It's that high across most of the area. We aren't the only ones with crop damage. Last year, there were farmers that lost 25% or more of their corn to deer damage, us included.

There's plenty of large bucks in the mix, and the habitat is certainly ideal.

[Farmsfulltime]

What does the DNR estimate other than too many . Would you like half as many deer and half as much crop damage ? Or is it a good trade off fantastic deer hunting and less income ?

[hockeybc69]

Sorry to come into this discussion a bit late.... Is this in MN??

[smsmith]

A push for an external audit of the DNR has begun. Elected are being contacted and forwarded this information http://mnbowhunters.org/2014/08/14/is-your-elected-going-to-bat-for-the-states-deer-hunters/

Once you look it over, if you feel we are justified in seeking such an audit, I'd encourage you to contact your elected and include the above link. Ask them if they will support the audit. If they will, forward that information to Brooks Johnson at [email protected]

Find your elected here http://www.gis.leg.mn/OpenLayers/districts/

[nonteepical]

Back when Ventura was chief, he wanted to put in place a board of governors made up of citizens to over see the DNR, i can't remember if it passed and then was dismantled by Pawlenty or if it never existed, either way i think it's something needed or looked at again. An audit is needed of the entire DNR,wich it would be i don't think they only audit one division like deer management.

Another change needed is money spent on deer hunting sales should go to deer management, not as it is today where all license sales go into a general fund and each DNR Dept writes up a yearly budget and they all (different divisions) fight it out for a piece of the pie.

[willyfahey]

I find this whole discussion quite disturbing. A farm is a business and the one running it should understand risk management and execute without needing the dnr to do it for them. I did a hsolist search and found zero ads for hunt my land for free or shoot my deer but plenty of people looking for places to hunt. So that crop damage doesn't hurt that bad. Sadly, this discussion has revolved around business and not hunting.

Historically it has been a cultural past time not just a natural resource. But, the DNR has worked very hard over the years to promote it from a business stand point in order to gain license sales. As noted, license sales have increased over the recent decade with very little increased benefit to the hunter in return. Just like fisheries management, it was a focus of take until one could take no more. Not enough money spent on improved habitat or hunter practices to improve success. For the DNR, it never was about successful hunts but increased revenue. The current low and high density hot spots are the result of a lack of an adequate, broad based management plan for sustainable and/or growing population for increased pressure and climate change.

In respect to the DNR, are we managing for quantity, quality or status quo? I'm not sure there's a direct answer but I'd say from what we've seen it was for harvest quantity. As a private land owner, herd management becomes a private issue and DNR really shouldn't be involved, IMHO. Especially since, as landdr has pointed out, a lot more can be accomplished this way to dictate deer density. The DNR would be more effective working on solely public lands and this is turn would bring much broader improvements.

I've hunted successfully on public lands on the range and NW WI and seen both areas in decline over the years. I see it primarily due to over harvest and wolf predation. With the decline in moose population, there's more pressure on the deer. The Wolf factor in all of this does not get the weight it deserves and goes to habitat management in general. From my standpoint, the DNR has done little to nothing to counter this increased imbalance with the high allowable hunter harvest.

[smsmith]

An audit is needed of the entire DNR,wich it would be i don't think they only audit one division like deer management.

I won't disagree with you on the necessity of an audit of the entire DNR, but certain sections/programs of the DNR have indeed been audited separately in the past. It has also been done (repeatedly) one state east. Personally, I want to see an external audit solely of the deer management area of the DNR. I don't want such an audit "watered down" by other issues. If an audit of the entire Dept. is needed, I'd much prefer to go division by division to ensure each gets the necessary attention. This isn't solely a financial audit (most folks think IRS and finances when they see/hear the word audit)...it is a review of the science (or lack thereof) our DNR uses for deer management.

[laker1]

We had a change this year,wait and see what happens. See past audits with politicians involved that has cost millions of dollars of political dump.

[smsmith]

We had a change this year,wait and see what happens. See past audits with politicians involved that has cost millions of dollars of political dump.

I for one am done waiting. Politics is and has been involved with deer management for quite awhile. WI's recent audit cost $150K. Deer license revenue brings in about $18 million a year.

[laker1]

Wisconsin audit ended up being a joke if you take the time to look at it.