Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[smsmith]

Looks like I touched a nerve since you quoted me. I take it that you spend time and money planting food plots. A simple question, if you were not allowed to hunt over a food plot would you spend the time and money to plant one? I don't bait, even though it's legal where I hunt and don't have a problem with people that do, or that hunt food plots. Simply an academic question.

That's an easy question to answer. I put in foodplots and hunt over...zero of them. Hunting over your foodplots is a recipe for educating the deer on your place. Its pretty tough to get in/out of stands that are located overlooking foodplots. I hunt deer coming to/from my plots...not right on top of them. So...yes...I would continue to put in foodplots if I couldn't hunt over them..because I already don't.

[creepworm]

That's an easy question to answer. I put in foodplots and hunt over...zero of them. Hunting over your foodplots is a recipe for educating the deer on your place. Its pretty tough to get in/out of stands that are located overlooking foodplots. I hunt deer coming to/from my plots...not right on top of them. So...yes...I would continue to put in foodplots if I couldn't hunt over them..because I already don't.

You are a smart dude. I am positive you know that you are in the extreme minority on this.

[nonteepical]

[Note from admin: Your post has been edited. Please read forum policy before posting again. Thank you.]

[smsmith]

I am positive you know that you are in the extreme minority on this.

I don't know how everybody else hunts, and I don't care. I was simply answering the posed question.

[Bureaucrat]

It did hit a nerve. About 2/3 of the posts on that page hit a nerve. To answer your question, yes, I sat in a stand 60 yards from my plot once this year. Nobody else sat over this plot the entire year. I didn't do it to kill "a deer." I did it because I wanted to admire my plot for the scenery of it. I put in rye and radishes so that the deer would have a late season food source and the shot at a few extra calories before 4 feet of snow and a hungry pack of wolves greeted them for winter.

It hit a nerve because someone road shot a deer off our property this year. It also hit a nerve because our neighbor keeps telling us how dumb we are for all the habitat work we do on our property. I suspect its more so to legitimize their complacency towards any effort to improve conditions on their property. They do nothing, and yet they shoot every deer they are allowed as they move through our plot and across a corner of their property.

It frustrates me because the envy of food plots is rooted in wanting to kill deer here and now. We food plot because we want to help deer in our area get through winter in better condition so that the deer herd may actually become a herd again. We plant trees, we cut trees, we try to build up winter woody browse and thermal cover. We do about 2 weeks of work and spend about $1000/year towards these goals.

I wish my neighbors would sit down with me and ask about what they could do to improve their property or how they could partner with me to do something so that there were more deer instead of hoping the government would take me down a notch so I don't have an unfair advantage.

I wish all those that shoot deer on or near my property would simply say thank you instead of calling me a jerk or a fool for all that we do.

[Farmsfulltime]

I don't think the conversation has anything to do with habitat improvement on your land . The conversation has to do with the fact that habitat improvement is how you enjoy deer hunting and deer management which is great. more power to you property rights are great. all for them except when certain groups lobby gooberment to change how I can enjoy my property maybe see the practice ag , or forestry, or any other things high deer pops effect. Theres a movement , an agenda and some are not happy being represented this way . When it comes to something you feel strongly and enjoy apparently it strikes a nerve well welcome to the club

[smsmith]

20-25 dpsm pre-fawn is a high deer population? I don't think so FFT.

[Farmsfulltime]

Ive expessed this before the population is no 20 dpsm HERE area 225,drove by one of our young alfalfa fields 16 acre feild planted this aug last sunday of firearms here counted 14 deer in sight that was after the harvest of deer. must be a hot spot or something or the ag crops that the deer mistake for food plots , my last post was a reference to the shortsighted views of those with an agenda, We will all sit at the table and all have an equal say in how deer populations will be managed and then the powers that be will make a management plan accordingly . I will be happy with the outcome also, maybe not everyone

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

my last post was a reference to the shortsighted views of those with an agenda

Agenda?

Permit area 239 was decided and agreed to "slightly raise" the deer densities in the 2007 stakeholders meetings.

Why is the harvest down 48% in that area?????

No agenda here. Crappy deer management is pretty clear.

[fr0sty]

The bear baiting thing is interesting. I used to watch a reality tv show that followed California DNR. Baiting bear is not allowed in Cali. The conservation officer caught some guys baiting bear. He went on an on about how it was poaching and unsporting. No one would think twice about it here, but out there it was not just illegal, but immoral.

Deer and Bear are different animals and different species so different hunting methods are allowed. Just like folks aren't allowed to use leg hold traps or snares for deer but are for beaver or fox or coyote.

Folks think it is fine to spear northerns but are aghast at those spearing walleye. Folks think it is fine to net whitefish and ciscoes but b****h about someone doing that to walleye and northern. Meanwhile spearing northerns but not muskies.

There is not rhyme nor reason nor consistency nor rationality in the fish and game laws.

[PurpleFloyd]

20-25 dpsm pre-fawn is a high deer population? I don't think so FFT.

Just curious. What would a pre fawn density translate to after the fawns are born? If your goal is a 1:1 Buck to doe ratio (QDMA?) and does average 2 fawns per birth year does that not double the population to 40-50 by the time summer rolls around? Obviously there would be some mortality but the numbers obviously go up a lot considering the herd is mainly does since all the bucks were shot the prior fall.

What is the target pre hunt density?

[smsmith]

Just curious. What would a pre fawn density translate to after the fawns are born? If your goal is a 1:1 Buck to doe ratio (QDMA?) and does average 2 fawns per birth year does that not double the population to 40-50 by the time summer rolls around? Obviously there would be some mortality but the numbers obviously go up a lot considering the herd is mainly does since all the bucks were shot the prior fall.

What is the target pre hunt density?

Does average 1.9 fawns in southern MN, but that doesn't mean those fawns are successfully recruited to season. Many are lost are before season rolls around. I don't recall anyone mentioning buck/doe ratios...besides you. That said, a 1:1 B/D ratio would be nearly impossible to attain in a state like MN. 1:2 would be about as close as a person could reasonably hope for.

Target pre-hunt densities with a 20-25 dpsm pre-fawn would likely be in the neighborhood of 28-35. Many of the deer left each year are fawns. Doe fawns in most of the northern 2/3-3/4 of MN are not bred and many of those that are do not successfully bring that fawn to birth. Antlered bucks usually compose right around 50% of the total harvest in MN.

[SmellEsox]

Is it really that hard to make distinctions? Honestly, anyone should be able to figure out the differences between baiting and food plots and baiting deer and bear. I baited deer when I lived and hunted in MI. Baiting made killing deer amazingly easy in the forested areas of MI. I literally could have killed deer with my bow every time I hunted. I also tried baiting in southern MI in agricultural areas an my bait basically rotted on the ground. In forested areas of MN it would be a slam dunk. I don't know if bears would be possible to hunt in MN w/o baiting. Populations would possibly get to nuisance levels if baiting weren't allowed. It's easy to make distinctions if you want to. Also, I'm not sure why getting rid of cross tagging is a way to get rid of drives. You can't do a drive if you can't cross tag?

[BuckSutherland]

In other news...

This warm up is sure gonna help our struggling herd up north. Hope whatever snow we do get is gone by mid March.

[smsmith]

In other news...

This warm up is sure gonna help our struggling herd up north. Hope whatever snow we do get is gone by mid March.

Yup, long range forecast is looking muchhhhh better than what we had the last two years in Dec. and Jan. Hope its at least somewhat accurate

[mntatonka]

who ever came up with the idea of 1:1 buck/doe being a good thing?

[smsmith]

who ever came up with the idea of 1:1 buck/doe being a good thing?

Nobody that I'm aware of. QDMA promotes a 1:2 as being about "as good as its gonna get", but in reality I think something along the lines of 1:2.5 are the only realistic goal on a statewide basis in most states. There's a lot more to B/D ratios than simply the number of each...its about the number of each AND their ages...at least under the QDM model

I'd post a link to an article on the subject, but it'd probably get me a "timeout"

[nonteepical]

who ever came up with the idea of 1:1 buck/doe being a good thing?

Mother nature

[mntatonka]

Mother nature

If that was the case, bucks and does would mate for life. Since bucks will breed many multiple does, a 1:1 ratio isn't necessarily the perfect thing to have.

[smsmith]

If that was the case, bucks and does would mate for life. Since bucks will breed many multiple does, a 1:1 ratio isn't necessarily the perfect thing to have.

That's not what I took from nonteepical's post...I thought he was saying that since does tend to drop a buck fawn and a doe fawn (when they drop twins) that Mother Nature intends for there to be one of each in the population.

I have seen studies that show slightly more doe fawns are normally dropped, but it wasn't significantly more (10% maybe?).

Why would bucks and does mate for life if there was one of each? Many does are bred by more than one buck, and as you state...many bucks breed more than one doe.

[PropsterII]

If that was the case, bucks and does would mate for life. Since bucks will breed many multiple does, a 1:1 ratio isn't necessarily the perfect thing to have.

Whoa, what planet are you from? The 1:1 comes from nature, roughly 50% of fawns are bucks and 50% are does, a hair higher on the bucks actually.

[mntatonka]

Whoa, what planet are you from? The 1:1 comes from nature, roughly 50% of fawns are bucks and 50% are does, a hair higher on the bucks actually.

and yet we have a drastic effect on nature, so 1:1 isn't possible, or necessarily even desirable anymore given that we hunt and are the alpha predators. Most goals are for trophies, and larger antlers being the measuring stick. In order to get those larger antlers, you have to cull the gene pool of "undesirables" (which isn't possible with certain regulations, but that's a different debate). That eliminates that 1:1 ratio being a good thing. You want that buck with the good genes passing on his genes, not a bunch of inferior bucks running around because there's so many of them.

It's no different than farming a cattle herd. You don't have 1 bull for every cow, because you control the genes being passed on by controlling what bull breeds the cows, and culling out the males (and to a lesser extent, the females) that don't have the genes you want.

[SmellEsox]

and yet we have a drastic effect on nature, so 1:1 isn't possible, or necessarily even desirable anymore given that we hunt and are the alpha predators. Most goals are for trophies, and larger antlers being the measuring stick. In order to get those larger antlers, you have to cull the gene pool of "undesirables" (which isn't possible with certain regulations, but that's a different debate). That eliminates that 1:1 ratio being a good thing. You want that buck with the good genes passing on his genes, not a bunch of inferior bucks running around because there's so many of them.

It's no different than farming a cattle herd. You don't have 1 bull for every cow, because you control the genes being passed on by controlling what bull breeds the cows, and culling out the males (and to a lesser extent, the females) that don't have the genes you want.

I think you are way overthinking things here mntatonka.

[BobT]

I would expect that it would be necessary to reproduce more does than bucks simply due to the mortality rates. It would be different if they routinely dropped litters of younguns or larger quantities like fish but they don't and since a single buck can breed multiple does but does can only get pregnant once per cycle, it would be self-destructive to the species to have a 1:1 ratio.

[O.T.C.]

We're mammals, we don't mate for life lol. Pray for a mild winter and better spring which it's turning into thankfully for the time being, pray for more wolves to be taken or whatever, those quota's seem to fill fast even though it was said by an expert wolves will be tough to get etc. that's a sham for sure, trapping them is a cakewalk as my neighbor called it, harder to catch a pocket gopher he said, pray the DNR will restrict tags as long as necessary. Time to forget about our record like harvests those years, we get upset at other hunters etc., how about the wolves that are slaughtering your deer also, that population was way underestimated and after they thinned the moose out they took a B-line for Ottertail county and others, hammering deer along the way and now we're trying to grow the herd with a growing wolf count, tougher to do.