Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[Getanet]

Is what conversation really worth having? I agree the low harvest was expected, no argument there.

If you're referring to closing the season, I think it is. I wasn't around in 1971, the last time they closed the season, but apparently it was due to a series of severe winters. Last winter was one of the worst on record, on the news this morning they stated this month is on it's way to being the coldest November on record. Things could change but that's not a great way to start the winter off.

A couple of miserable winters, more grumbling about the deer herd than anytime I can recall, more wolves across a wider range than anytime I can recall, and what's shaping up to be low harvest...I definitely think a closed season could at least be in the conversation.

[Bureaucrat]

This argument is absolutely worth having. The reason we are here in the first place is because of poor management decisions. Despite the fact that the DNR has pulled back on tags does not fix the underlying problem that got us here in the first place. Reliable survey data thrown out, known faulty data being used, goal setting recommendations ignored, and a questionable committment on behalf of the DNR on whether they feel deer are an asset to be valued, or a liability to be controlled.

Down 52% so far in all of series 100? Heads in sand will not fix this problem.

[jay83196]

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. Has any body heard about a dnr employee in deer management that was fired for taking bribes from insurance company's? Apparently he was keeping certain areas at intensive harvest etc to lower deer numbers for insurance companys...I don't know if true so not saying is true, the person I heard it from said his name etc and sure sounded like he knew what he was saying. Not sure when sounded like last year or even more recent....

[Todd Caswell]

Quote:

If you're referring to closing the season, I think it is. I wasn't around in 1971, the last time they closed the season, but apparently it was due to a series of severe winters. Last winter was one of the worst on record, on the news this morning they stated this month is on it's way to being the coldest November on record. Things could change but that's not a great way to start the winter off.

Could be wrong but I though it was also due to very dry conditions, and high fire danger.. I don't believe they would ever completly close a season due to "low " numbers

[Farmsfulltime]

If you heard this on the internet it must be true, come on bribes from insurance companies you've got to be kidding or maybe last Saturday evening bar talk

[jay83196]

Did I say I read it online! That's why I was asking I heard it from sombody I typical think isn't one to flap about "bar talk " etc. But I didn't say was true thats why I was ASKING if anybody heard that same thing. I've heard worse things in the word and it wouldn't surprise me in the least, but could be talk.

[laker1]

Harvesting bucks only if population is low does not effect the overall population at all long term. No need for a closed season.

If weather doesn't dictate the population will rebound fast. Regulations are in place to do that in most areas,except a few hunters choice should be lottery.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

Has any body heard about a dnr employee in deer management that was fired for taking bribes from insurance company's?

Thats funny. But I am 100% certain that Beau Liddell still has his job.... Oh, maybe I just assumed he was the one that was being referenced.

[ESSGuy]

My dad who is 72 hunted Grand Marais during that period , he thinks 1972 had a 2 day season at least in that area. So basically 2 closed years.

[Jameson]

I guess I question if two years of low hunter success rate is better than one closed season and one season of very good hunter success rate.

[smsmith]

I'm all in for shutting it down for a season (or two). It'll never happen though..no way will the DNR forego that $$$. Heck, they were selling bonus permits for units where guys couldn't even use them this year. All about that money

Make 95% of the state lottery next year...that may be "doable". Why this unit is still HC this year is beyond me.

[hockeybc69]

If we get through this winter in decent shape next fall i will bet looks very similar to the 2013 season designations in the southern 2/3's of the state...

They have us right where they want us..

[jay83196]

Yeah mark my words no way will it close they would lose millions in revenue they need the money too much. Moose shoulda closed many years with numbers down but didn't and that's not a fraction of money.

[smsmith]

If we get through this winter in decent shape next fall i will bet looks very similar to the 2013 season designations in the southern 2/3's of the state...

They have us right where they want us..

I believe you are correct. Unless this winter's WSI is on par with last year's...I'd anticipate a great number of units going to a less conservative level (lottery to HC, HC to Managed, etc.).

I expect the "new normal" of total deer harvest to be in the 175K range from now on. So many hunters here saw/see nothing wrong with that...amazing how quickly deer hunters in MN accept whatever is handed to them by the MN DNR.

[hockeybc69]

My kids are growing into the sport right now. They know no different. This is the norm they will get to know..

To them it is what it is. This is deer hunting.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

No different from the norm I grew up with (late 80's - late 90's). I quit hunting too for about 5 years in my late teens early 20's because of it too. Had I not befriended a few hunters in college I may have never got back into it.

It's in the DNR's best interest to have higher deer populations if they want to retain hunters and recruit new ones. Let's hope the suits running the show realize that.

[smsmith]

My kids are growing into the sport right now. They know no different. This is the norm they will get to know..

To them it is what it is. This is deer hunting.

Yup...exactly.

Get an entire generation of hunters used to this type of hunting and its what they'll expect. What sucks is that those of us who used to hunt in places with an actual deer herd who move here get pretty friggin' frustrated Its pretty sad to think that THIS is what many folks in MN think deer hunting is supposed to be like.

Oh well, I'll suck it up for however long I live in this deer desert and never look back when I get the chance to move on to a state with a DNR/F&G who actually value their deer herd.

[BuckSutherland]

It's in the DNR's best interest to have higher deer populations if they want to retain hunters and recruit new ones. Let's hope the suits running the show realize that.

Yes indeed!!

My area 172 had a decent population 2010-2012. It is pretty poor now. Fields that used to hold 20-30 deer on a drive by in July now have 3 or 4.

I think a lot of the areas should have made the sacrifice this year and been bucks only. We could have had one year with very few deer shot, increased doe numbers, and possibly a much better season next year. But instead, we went half way with lottery, letting kids and bow hunters wack away. Some of the hunters did ok this weekend and others did quite poor. Next season is already lining up to be quite poor as well.

[nofishfisherman]

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. Has any body heard about a dnr employee in deer management that was fired for taking bribes from insurance company's? Apparently he was keeping certain areas at intensive harvest etc to lower deer numbers for insurance companys...I don't know if true so not saying is true, the person I heard it from said his name etc and sure sounded like he knew what he was saying. Not sure when sounded like last year or even more recent....

After working for an auto insurance company for several years I can assure you that the odds of that happening are very low. I worked in the department that would have been the ones doing the bribing in a case like that as it was our jobs to set rates and manage claim losses. I won't get into all the nitty gritty details but there are a million reasons why it wouldn't make any sense to bribe a DNR official in an attempt to reduce claim losses due to deer accidents. There are plenty of legal ways insurance companies protect themselves from various risks whether they be deer, weather, fraud, bad drivers, etc.

Besides there being other alternatives the numbers just wouldn't make sense. I just don't see any one company insuring enough drivers in one small area that it would provide enough of a financial incentive to risk criminal charges and government intervention. They would be risking far more than they could ever gain.

[jay83196]

Glad to hear that! I hope it wouldn't happen, why I asked people incase was true and others heard it to confirm it.

[smsmith]

Could be wrong but I though it was also due to very dry conditions, and high fire danger.. I don't believe they would ever completly close a season due to "low " numbers

I don't see anything in here about dry conditions...just bad winters and over harvest of does http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/133044308.html

A quote from another source:

The five words that would bring any deer hunter to tears were spoken in 1971, “deer hunting season is closed”. Fierce winters and unregulated hunting depleted deer numbers severely. Thus the season was closed in an attempt to form regulations and restabilize the herd.

After a five year hiatus, 1976 was the year antlerless permits were introduced. A specific number of does and fawns were allowed to be hunted in each of the 120 permit areas. Biologists reviewed density charts, then adjusted the amount of permits given according to population levels wanted.

Sure seems to me like closing the season this year (or next) is a discussion worth having. If not a closure, a complete elimination of antlerless harvest in the northern half of the state would/should be discussed.

[jay83196]

500.000 hunters × $31.00 license = $15,500.00....thats not including any bonus tags bow or muzzle loading hunters.....NEVER EVER HAPPEN!

[Deet]

500.000 hunters × $31.00 license = $15,500.00....thats not including any bonus tags bow or muzzle loading hunters.....NEVER EVER HAPPEN!

Wow, getting fancy here!

Try again.

[leechlake]

$15.5 million btw.

The largest impact on not having a deer season is to the economy's of the towns where deer hunters hunt. Bars, cafes, restaurants, stores etc. At least for the traveling hunter which I'd guess is 1/3-1/2 of the 500,000. Let's say it's 200,000 hunters who each spend $100 or more most likely. Big number to local small towns.

The numbers aren't going to get better without having does to have fawns, better mortality by getting lucky with at least two mellow Winters in a row. I'd scratch bow hunters and muzzy guys to be able to take does as a start. I don't bow hunt as much as I used to but even in our cruddy area I'd wager I could shoot a doe or more every year with my bow if I wanted to.

[leech~~]

No different from the norm I grew up with (late 80's - late 90's). I quit hunting too for about 5 years in my late teens early 20's because of it too. Had I not befriended a few hunters in college I may have never got back into it.

You know you quit for part of High school and college cuse other things were more important like chasing girls and boozing!