Audit Push: Time To Act!

[laker1]

Late 80's and early 90's were very good hunting and I agree populations may have been under estimated,but also seasons were more conservative in the 80's,thus building up of surplus of what I call breeder does(age 2.5 and older) that were capable of producing twins every year.

Also I think they were estimating populations different. May have still been doing pellet counts than?

Yes use as many tools or methods as possible to compare data yearly,deer populations depend on so many variables that change constantly,winter,hunting pressure,predator mortality etc.

[PurpleFloyd]

To be honest Purple, I think the carcass data actually matches the population better than the DNR estimate. I think they were hugely underestimating the population back in the 90s and way overestimating from the mid 2000's on. Hunting and deer sightings were far better in the 90's than the 2000s for me and many of the hunters I know.

The problem is that what everyone thinks is the case is largely local. You saw more in the 90's than now, we see more now than we did then and they are bigger and others see different than both of us and in the end no matter what the DNR does, it's all statistics and we all know that statistics can be made to make any case you want if you present them the right way.

I liked the whole debate better last year before this thread when we got nearly mutual agreement that we should worry about Habitat as the key to making sure there are deer around because that is way better than burying our head in stats that will be different next year than they are this year and will continually keep us looking back rather than forward.

[smsmith]

I liked the whole debate better last year before this thread when we got nearly mutual agreement that we should worry about Habitat as the key to making sure there are deer around

Not much of a debate with nearly mutual agreement

[laker1]

Without habitat,all other factors mean nothing.

[PurpleFloyd]

Not much of a debate with nearly mutual agreement

think about that for a moment.

[PurpleFloyd]

Not much of a debate with nearly mutual agreement

Since I have your attention, would you care to elaborate on why you were basing your assertions about the DNR numbers on vehicle collisions when that article I posted showed they were flawed when compared to carcass removal numbers?

[smsmith]

think about that for a moment.

Habitat I've got...and so does this area for miles and miles in every direction. I feel for many of you folks down south where farmers have destroyed much of the habitat in the name of increased corn production.

[PurpleFloyd]

Habitat I've got...and so does this area for miles and miles in every direction. I feel for many of you folks down south where farmers have destroyed much of the habitat in the name of increased corn production.

You may have the wrong type of habitat or the habitat may be missing one crucial element when hunter pressure is high and that is refuge.When the pressure of the season is on,where can the deer go to get away from the pressure? If the answer is nowhere then you need more refuge for the deer to go to. Plant 5 acres of corn and don't shoot deer in it and don't push them out of it. You can do the same with cedars or other shrubs/trees etc. You need to match the habitat to hunting pressure and where you are located I imagine there are a lot of urban cowboys that hit the closest woods they can find,which is probably your neck of the woods.

In the South Central to South West part of the state I came across some pretty big chunks of land that were purchased by the Nature Conservancy(Not that I support them in any way) that don't allow hunting. We are talking 600 acres or more per section.Manage your property that way and get others to do the same and you will have deer.

Did you by chance miss my post about the deer crash data?

[SmellEsox]

Since I have your attention, would you care to elaborate on why you were basing your assertions about the DNR numbers on vehicle collisions when that article I posted showed they were flawed when compared to carcass removal numbers?

The problem with your stance is that you put your trust in DNR's estimates. What I see is deer collisions and carcass removal declining rapidly in the last several years which indicates a rapidly declining population.

[laker1]

The Nature Conservancy has done a great job,which more organizations would be so ambitious in saving habitat,including much shoreline habitat.

Yes also in much of northern Minnesota their land is open to hunting.

Yes as a hunter I support them and organizations that support habitat. Maybe off main subject,but it was brought up.

[DaveT]

You may have the wrong type of habitat

I chuckled. You need better habitat, Stu.

[Farmsfulltime]

For that matter our own DNR has and does do a great job with managing lands and habitat , their tasks are varied as the lands in Minnesota . Their lands are also open to public hunting . This is not off topic as no habitat no game , we all recognize that weather the habitat is ag fields or food plots if your going to have deer they need a place to live . I am sure we will have full hunter participation this year and many years to come . Some hunters will shoot a deer every year some don't care to that's what it all about . Where the ag fields and brushy cover are there plenty of deer to be had maybe even too many in some locals

[Farmsfulltime]

From reading these threads it sounds like sm has plenty of a-1 cover habitat , how many cameras do you have out are you seeing no deer at all , is it really that bad or maybe not the right type of deer or numbers ??

[PurpleFloyd]

Since I have your attention, would you care to elaborate on why you were basing your assertions about the DNR numbers on vehicle collisions when that article I posted showed they were flawed when compared to carcass removal numbers?

[SmellEsox]

That is where you are wrong. I am not trusting any estimates at all. The MDDI seems to trust any that don't come from the DNR and none that do.

My stance is that population stats will never be as accurate as the MDDI is looking for and even if they get close they still have you looking to the past and not to the future.

As far as your last paragraph goes, it is universally accepted that the deer population grew from the 90's through the mid 2000's and yet the data shows a reduction in deer collisions and carcass removal over that period. That negates your assumption.

I think the population was increasing till about 02 or 03 and then antlerless harvest began reducing the herd. Harvests will support that. So do deer collisions. I think by the mid 2000s, the herd was well on its way to significant decline and that was the goal of DNR. They just went too far. And DNR population estimates say the herd was continuing to rise through the late 2000s. I think their model is not working. As excessive permits continued to be sold and the harvest declined almost annually from 2003 to 2013, the DNR said the herd was increasing until recently. Something is wrong.

[smsmith]

I chuckled. You need better habitat, Stu.

Yup...I'm pretty new to the whole habitat thing...maybe some guys from here could educate me.

[smsmith]

From reading these threads it sounds like sm has plenty of a-1 cover habitat , how many cameras do you have out are you seeing no deer at all , is it really that bad or maybe not the right type of deer or numbers ??

I'm running 3 cams right now. Low numbers of antlerless deer are my primary concern. I have zero mature bucks running around either, but hey...its MN...that's the norm

As a private landowner who has time and ability to do a lot of habitat work, my situation is better than many. I truly feel sorry for public land hunters and private land owners who don't have the time or ability to work on their properties to make them better.

[PurpleFloyd]

Where do the deer go to hide on your property when they are under pressure?

[smsmith]

Deer are never "under pressure" on my place.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

Where do the deer go to hide on your property when they are under pressure?

We have 40 acres of land that we pretty much do not touch year round.... At least our goal is that it would be a safe haven for deer/wildlife.

We are in our 3rd year of the sanctuary.... Hasnt done diddly for deer sightings for us. Kinda fun to pay $500 in property taxes for 40 acres that we dont even get to use.

So frustrating to be honest.. And especially in the area that we are in.

[Bureaucrat]

I wish the season were here and past the first weekend so we could get some live reports from the orange army. I can tell you our trail cam surveys are terrible this season compared to last. I think this year I'm going to get a clicker and keep it in my pocket to count shots for the first two days.

[PurpleFloyd]

Deer are never "under pressure" on my place.

and your neighbors?

[Bureaucrat]

I bought my clicker on amazon today. Could make for an interesting project over three or five years.

[Getanet]

I always love how it's usually too dark to read my watch when I hear the first shot of the season.

[smsmith]

and your neighbors?

To answer your question Floyd...there is a large (350 acreish) cattail/tag alder/tamarack swamp that surrounds an environmental lake. My section of that area forms my western property boundary, and it forms the boundary for everyone who has property that butts up to said environmental lake. On my place that area comprises maybe 17-20 acres or so. That area is permanent sanctuary, hasn't seen human activity for the time I've owned it, and before then it saw very, very limited human activity (like getting pushed second weekend of deer season every 3rd year or so). On the other side of my place (my property is not square or rectangle, very odd shaped) there is a creek bottom with a ridge on either side of it. That area is also permanent sanctuary and is made up of maybe 12-15 acres. Other areas on my place I've done hinge cutting to make it appear as though a tornado went through and have planted several thousand evergreens mixed in/under those hinge cuts. Other than trails, about an acre of wildflowers, mini-orchards, and several acres of foodplots, my entire property sees very little human activity 80+% of the year.

I've been doing habitat work since I was a kid (started on my folks' place(s) mid 70's), and went gungho on habitat sometime in the early 90's when I bought my first chunk of ground. When I bought my current place I did my homework on the habitat of the area, I looked at a good number of parcels before buying here. The area has fantastic habitat for miles and miles in every direction. Excellent mix of elevations here too, always nice for funneling movement. Not to sound overly arrogant, but I know what I'm doing when it comes to habitat. I've helped others with their habitat for a number of years as well. Can't tell you how many questions I've answered about fruit trees and mast bearing shrubs/trees in the last 20 years...100's anyway.

There's always more to learn, so if you have nuggets of wisdom for me I'm all ears.