Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[Farmsfulltime]

Doesn't matter if the people trust the DNR or not , The agency isn't going any where and they are in charge of setting seasons and limits and will do a good job moving forward. Work with them or be ignored reasonable input will win the day . Plenty of deer still in the woods to work with the lower harvests I see an easing of tags soon next year? certainly the following year . We are in area 225 and filled fast one tag left out of 6 and that will be done by Saturday no lack of sightings here .

[Todd Caswell]

I'm going to take what my license allows me to period, I applied for a doe permit didn't get drawn, so I took a small buck, if I had been drawn I would have taken the first nice doe I saw. I deer hunt 3 to 4 days a year and spend the rest of the fall chasing my dogs around. I enjoy venison and the sausage we make with it, non of it goes to waste and most years its gone in a couple monthes. Sorry but I'm not going to pass on a adult buck or doe. Smith if you really want to manage your land and Your own herd put a fence around it. There's an old saying that goes something like this

"Watch your own bobber and quit watching mine"

[smsmith]

Okay guys, I'm about done arguing with you all. But...one more question for those of you who say to let the DNR do what they do and roll with it.

When (not if) the DNR begins a push for expansion of APRs and an end to crosstagging/party hunting for bucks will you have the same stance?

[Farmsfulltime]

Exactly,, Deer hunting is many things to many people none of them wrong as they say to each his own

[Farmsfulltime]

APR s and party hunting will never be on the table in Minnesota state wide, In fact bring the population up and deer hunter numbers down as some have said is happening and party hunting becomes more of a management tool.

[smsmith]

APR s and party hunting will never be on the table in Minnesota state wide, In fact bring the population up and deer hunter numbers down as some have said is happening and party hunting becomes more of a management tool.

I would agree they'll never be on the table statewide, but they will indeed be on the table for expansion....I'd guess sooner rather than later.

[96trigger]

Quote:

we also ended up with a deer harvest of 270,000 by letting the DNR handle it. So it's pretty clear they can increase (and decrease) the population. Now they have the chance to stabilize it, by bringing it up slowly to an accepted level and keeping it there.

My issue has never been with the rate at how they bring up the population, it has been with the rate at which they bring it down.

Too many of you have no clue what APR has done to the Southeast. I'm not going to get into that discussion because I have had it, numerous times, with many of you, but I have not heard a complaint about APR in the southeast from a southeast hunter in a long time. The only ones that complain are on the outside looking in.

[Farmsfulltime]

ok we shall see , nothing would surprise me entirely . Don't know where the support for it would come from DNR isn't to keen on it and it would take the legislators and cant see the support there soon but you never know with politics and if the legislators pass it then the DNR did not do it so maybe ?

[smsmith]

ok we shall see , nothing would surprise me entirely . Don't know where the support for it would come from DNR isn't to keen on it and it would take the legislators and cant see the support there soon but you never know with politics and if the legislators pass it then the DNR did not do it so maybe ?

au contraire....the DNR is indeed keen on APR expansion and eliminating the crosstagging/party hunting of bucks. They just need the right time/political climate to pursue expansion. A couple years of herd rebuilding and then we're on the next issue(s). I anxiously anticipate your continued compliance and support of the DNR at that time.

[Jameson]

... but I have not heard a complaint about APR in the southeast from a southeast hunter in a long time. The only ones that complain are on the outside looking in.

The complainers stopped hunting there. I've talked to at least a couple of folks that no longer hunt SE MN due to APR's.

[Getanet]

au contraire....the DNR is indeed keen on APR expansion and eliminating the crosstagging/party hunting of bucks. They just need the right time/political climate to pursue expansion. A couple years of herd rebuilding and then we're on the next issue(s). I anxiously anticipate your continued compliance and support of the DNR at that time.

That's not what Leslie wrote to me when I asked her about cross tagging/party hunting. There's no way the DNR wants to alienate a large portion of the hunting public by banning cross-tagging. The only reason they would even consider it is because some of the groups that whine like toddlers bend their ear every chance they get, while most of us have better things to do with our time than worry about how we can ruin someone else's hunt to improve ours.

[CaptainMusky]

I just find it humorous in a sick, twisted way that so many Minnesotans are ready to hand over all the decision making to the gooberment. Go with that...see where it gets you. Oh...that's right, we did that and ended up with a deer harvest barely over 100K. Well done gooberment.

The same gooberment agency that has provided MN with a record deer harvest is now to blame for a record low? Did you give them credit for the good days? Probably not.

The problem is US!!! Like I mentioned earlier (I said it was directed toward you, but this time it is) Just because you CAN shoot 5 deer with intensive harvest tags, etc doesnt mean its a good thing. The hunter has the responsibility of harvesting the animal and makes that decision its not like the DNR passes out deer after you purchase your license.

The limits have changed dramatically where I hunt in response to the population changes. I think they have done what they needed to do where I hunt.

[BuckSutherland]

The same gooberment agency that has provided MN with a record deer harvest is now to blame for a record low? Did you give them credit for the good days? Probably not.

The problem is US!!! Like I mentioned earlier (I said it was directed toward you, but this time it is) Just because you CAN shoot 5 deer with intensive harvest tags, etc doesnt mean its a good thing. The hunter has the responsibility of harvesting the animal and makes that decision its not like the DNR passes out deer after you purchase your license.

The limits have changed dramatically where I hunt in response to the population changes. I think they have done what they needed to do where I hunt.

So approximately 10 years ago the harvest was 290,000 animals. This year looks like around 100,000 will bring it home. That is quite the shift in 10 years. Tells me that the models they are using are not working or are not that reliable or they are just plain incompetent. You think other states are having shifts that dramatic???

[Getanet]

You think other states are having shifts that dramatic???

I don't know about total harvest changes, but after last deer hunting season I had posted news articles from nearly every state which talked about hunters being upset about low harvests. Iowa, Wisconsin, ND, Missouri, Illinois, etc. If I recall correctly, Kansas was about the only state where hunters weren't upset.

[mntatonka]

The complainers stopped hunting there. I've talked to at least a couple of folks that no longer hunt SE MN due to APR's.

no, we're just waiting for the right time to push it out.

[96trigger]

Quote:

The complainers stopped hunting there. I've talked to at least a couple of folks that no longer hunt SE MN due to APR's.

Then explain to me why there are more people hunting the southeast than ever before? Have YOU hunted down here consecutively the last 8 years to see the change? Did your "sources" give it any time? Or did they just take their ball and go home? You can sit behind a computer and complain all day long, I have plenty of sources down here that love it. I have at least 2 people a year for the last 3 years, on this site alone PM for info on taking trips down here and asking for information. Yeah, APR stinks. Thats why hunter satisfaction is rising and people are coming here to hunt.

I will add, that if the population isn't high enough, it will never work, and that the DNR must take caution in handing out too many doe tags so the population doesn't crash.

[CaptainMusky]

So approximately 10 years ago the harvest was 290,000 animals. This year looks like around 100,000 will bring it home. That is quite the shift in 10 years. Tells me that the models they are using are not working or are not that reliable or they are just plain incompetent. You think other states are having shifts that dramatic???

Yes, other states are facing the same issues. Maybe not as dramatic harvest in other states, but Wisconsin reduced their limits this year as well.

What has happened in the last 10 years Buck? We have had 3 of the worst winters in recorded history. 2 of them being in the last consecutive winters.

You cannot forecast this in advance. If they could, then they would have reduced the harvest limits in the season prior to the winter knowing it would be tough on the herd. But since thats not possible they react by reducing them the following year and hope that the following winter will be more normal. Well, that hasnt happened.

Perhaps all those folks hadnt shot their 5 does in the years there were plenty of deer it wouldnt have been such a dramatic drop off. Dont be so hasty to blame the DNR when they make the limits, but the hunters are the ones who pull the triggers.

[hockeybc69]

In other words you are saying that you know(or agree) the population is down, correct?

Then why is the DNR saying every year for the last 10 years that going into the hunt, we are at about million deer.

What are they counting to come up with those numbers every year?

[NWKR]

Where did 290,000 deer go in 2011? The DNR adjusted them away with changes to their model. When you go to the DNR HSOforum and look at the DPSM report from 2011 at the bottom the webpage 23 of the 36 permit areas in the forest zone were adjusted downwards by more than 30% in 2012. They made this adjustment in 2012 to 2011 and prior DPSM numbers. The updated DPSM numbers the DNR has posted in the deer hunting area off by 161k total deer pre fawning which ends up being around 290k deer with a buck to doe ratio of 1:4 and recruitment of 1 fawn per doe.

They say we have 1 million deer? 29% disappeared from 2011 when the model was changed in 2012. Hmmmm.

Look at the densities here:

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/recreation/hunting/deer/deer_density_prefawn_spreadsheet11.pdf

And then look at them here starting at page 25 from the 2012 report:

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/wildlife/population2012/1-farmland-wildlife.pdf

I emailed Leslie asking about the differences and no reply was received. I will resend to her after hunting season when she may not be as busy. I have exchanged some emails with Gino and this is what he sent me last Friday. I had sent him a copy of my spreadsheet and he did not dispute the numbers at all. Just gave me a little pat on the head, saying don't worry little deer hunter we have this under control:

Quote:

We use harvest data, other indices, and population models to track changes in deer abundance with a primary focus on estimating whether populations are increasing, stable, or decreasing. Management designations are not based on densities, but they are based on interpretation of these multiple indices and estimation of the harvest levels that will result from management designations within a region. Models are not intended to provide perfectly accurate estimates of deer densities at any specific point in time. So, although the density estimates in reports change as we gain more data, it doesn’t mean that management designations were based on poor data. Each year that we obtain data, we are able to improve our understanding of how deer populations respond to management in an area, and the reports reflect that. Thanks for your interest and I hope you have a great opener tomorrow.

Numbers are off by more than 30% over thousands of sq miles and its not poor data??? It really doesn't affect my hunting much since we have a larger property we manage for hunting. But the continued line of b s we hear is ridiculous.

I would be happy to hear someone from the DNR say, hey we screwed up and we are working to get better.

[96trigger]

I think his email to you is saying that in a very round about way. I take the email as they know the data collection is not great and that they are continuing to look for improving methods of collecting population data.

[CaptainMusky]

In other words you are saying that you know(or agree) the population is down, correct?

Then why is the DNR saying every year for the last 10 years that going into the hunt, we are at about million deer.

What are they counting to come up with those numbers every year?

Who are you asking this to? Me? I have no idea where the million deer came from, I guess I havent paid attention to what they say pertaining to estimated population the last 10 years. It doesnt matter much to me in reality because I am not looking to fill my freezer with as many carcasses as I can. When I was able to shoot 5 total deer I bagged one and was done. I certainly could have shot 5 and been on my merry way like many of you, but I was more concerned about long range management than the "here and now" that some people care about.

[NWKR]

I think his email to you is saying that in a very round about way. I take the email as they know the data collection is not great and that they are continuing to look for improving methods of collecting population data.

Yes, it does say that they are working on improving the models and getting better data. But in no way does it say anything was wrong before. I wonder about the reasons for not having more recent dpsm #s posted here:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/deer/index.html

At the bottom of the webpage are the 2011 numbers that had 23 permit areas adjusted downwards by 30%+ for 2012 modeling. They don't want hunters to know that their high estimates were off for so many years? Which they would find out once the 2012 and 2013 reports were posted.

[B. Amish]

maybe they don't have time to update because they're too busy replying to emails from people that demand answers to their questions because 'they work for me'. then, when they get a response, take the response to a message board and dissect every sentence of it for hidden meanings or half truths that aren't there.

and if they don't get a response, they call their legislator, or start dragging people's names trough the mud on forums and letters to the editor. and then the employee has to deal with that entire can of worms which takes up even more time.

[Jameson]

I can't explain everything in life to you 96trigger, and I don't comment on here much at all about zone 3. You are right I have no experience there, and thus have shut my trap about it a long time ago. But your report was that you don't talk to hunters in Zone 3 that don't like hunting there with the APR's, and I tried to give my report of talking to former Zone 3 hunters who gave up hunting there do to APR's to try to give the full picture not just one side. Are the folks that I talked to the minority? Probably. Do they not exist? Nope.

[NWKR]

maybe they don't have time to update because they're too busy replying to emails from people that demand answers to their questions because 'they work for me'. then, when they get a response, take the response to a message board and dissect every sentence of it for hidden meanings or half truths that aren't there.

and if they don't get a response, they call their legislator, or start dragging people's names trough the mud on forums and letters to the editor. and then the employee has to deal with that entire can of worms which takes up even more time.

LOL, yup I guess so.