Media Concerned About Minnesota Deer

[Bureaucrat]

See for yourself, or pasted below: http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/stor...ffect/19975809/

The deer kill during the nine-day gun season this year was the lowest in 32 years.

That might not sit well with those who can remember 2000, when the deer kill of 528,494 more than doubled the 191,550 taken this year, according to preliminary numbers, a 64 percent decrease in 14 years. The 2000 deer kill set a record and the number of licenses sold was the second most — 694,712 licenses; the record is 699,275 set in 1990 — for a 76 percent success rate for hunters. It makes this year's 31 percent rate seems paltry by comparison.

Even if you hunted in the 1980s and 1990s, you were used to many years when the success rate was from 40 to 50 percent.

It's true, the 2014 gun-deer kill was lowest since 1982, when 182,715 were taken. However, the 1982 deer harvest set a record at the time.

Quite often people gauge the success of the hunt by the number of deer killed, but we have to look at the big picture and how the deer kill, herd management and participation are equally important parts of the puzzle.

A more disconcerting statistic than the harvest is the low number of licenses sold this year — 608,711 through midnight Nov. 30, the last day of the gun-deer season.

POSTCRESCENT

Browse, share photos from hunting seasons

It's a 3.9 percent drop from last year and a 12.4 percent decrease from the high-water mark in 2000. The sales were lower than 2002 when fears of chronic wasting disease likely scared away some hunters and not seen since the early 1970s.

The state Department of Natural Resources has done a good job with its youth hunts and mentorship programs in trying to attract young hunters, but nothing will bore a young hunter quicker than not seeing a deer.

It discourages experienced hunters, too.

The result is some people give up deer hunting.

The impact of a decrease in license sales reverberates throughout the state. Fewer license sales mean less money for conservation and wildlife habitat restoration, it means fewer hunters purchasing hunting gear and spending money at northwoods hotels and restaurants, it means fewer venison donations to food pantries, it means less business for deer processors.

Wisconsinoutdoorfun.com: More hunting news from around the state

This is where herd management comes in. A robust, but managed, herd is necessary to attract hunters and license sales.

The DNR has tried to more accurately gauge the herd with the Deer Trustee Report. Changes that began this year emphasize cooperation between the agency and hunters. It also looks to manage the deer population by county instead of deer management unit.

Also, the DNR a year ago named Bob Nack to lead the Deer Management Assistance Program, which the agency describes as a "cooperative effort between the DNR, landowners and hunter to provide habitat and deer herd management assistance" to those interested.

The DNR's efforts need more time to determine whether they're effective, but we hope that as part of the effort that the DNR takes into the account of predators — wolf and bear — on the herd and listens to what the hunters are saying.

We also hope hunters help with these efforts by mentoring hunters, continuing in the rich tradition despite these leans years and taking part in DNR efforts to get input from hunters.

TAKE THE SURVEY

One way to do your part is to take the Wisconsin Deer Hunter Wildlife Survey at http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/wlsurvey.html.

[smsmith]

Note this sentence in particular

"This is where herd management comes in. A robust, but managed, herd is necessary to attract hunters and license sales."

[creepworm]

Um, I guess I see nothing about MN anywhere in that article.

[leech~~]

Well it was published by the GreenBay Pressgazette!

[smsmith]

Um, I guess I see nothing about MN anywhere in that article.

Exactly...WI's mainstream media is already putting articles like that together and season has only been closed a little over a week.

I guess MN businesses aren't impacted by the fact our total kill is down by over 50% and license sales are down about the same percentage as WI.

[creepworm]

Exactly...WI's mainstream media is already putting articles like that together and season has only been closed a little over a week.

I guess MN businesses aren't impacted by the fact our total kill is down by over 50% and license sales are down about the same percentage as WI.

Ya, we should probably get a petition going to audit the MN DNR. The Wisconsin audit did an amazing job. It took the utopia of deer hunting that is Wisconsin and put it in the exact same shape as MN which has not had an audit. Real effective I tells ya.

[smsmith]

Ya, we should probably get a petition going to audit the MN DNR. The Wisconsin audit did an amazing job. It took the utopia of deer hunting that is Wisconsin and put it in the exact same shape as MN which has not had an audit. Real effective I tells ya.

The changes recommended by the WI audit are just now being put in place. Time will tell what comes of them.

The preliminary CDAC results out of WI are available online if anybody wants to see them. Even in the CWD areas the CDAC's recommendation was to maintain their herd size in all but two counties. One county on the edge of the CWD zone voted to increase, one county in the CWD zone voted to decrease. Here in much of central MN we are at the density goal that the WI DNR had wanted to get to but never got close...so they'll maintain higher densities in a known disease area than we have here where no evidence of CWD in wild deer has been found. Makes perfect sense

[PurpleFloyd]

So our DNR needs to be audited and had the lowest harvest in 20 years and the model the MDDI used as the gold standard to our east produced the lowest harvest in 32 years.And now the dramatic drop in Wisconsin is being used as another excuse to take a shot at the MNDNR. Priceless.

[Bureaucrat]

Um, I guess I see nothing about MN anywhere in that article.

There's almost nothing about MN in that story other than the similar circumstances in herd health. From there, you are correct, it's completely opposite of the situation in Minnesota.

In this article you see:

*A genuine acknowledgement of concern by a media outlet.

*An attempt to quantify the impact of a prolonged decline on the sport and economy.

*An acknowledgement of some good that came of their agency and program review.

*Praise for a new program to begin cooperation between the agency and hunters.

*An understanding that program changes won't produce results immediately.

*A call to realize and quantify the impact of predators.

*A call to participate in input opportunities provided by the WDNR.

I agree, there is almost no similarity to MN in that article.

[BuckSutherland]

I guess I dont understand why some of you are so afraid of an audit of the DNR. What the hell are you afraid of?? They have no oversight and they dont really answer to anybody. Is it just not conceivable to some of you idiots that things could be made better??

Is it cause its gonna take some funds and time to audit them?? We are $18 trillion in the hole as a country, I dont think it really matters what we do at the state level.

[Bureaucrat]

Iowa also performed a "program review" of their deer management. I started skimming the report and found some interesting stuff. Here's the link to the full report: Review of Iowa's Deer Management Program (I think it's clickable at the bottom of the post.)

First the recommendations.

I found this one interesting:

And this one:

Iowa DNR

[Bureaucrat]

The committee didn't recommend ending party hunting. The committee didn't recommend antler point restrictions. They didn't call for anyone's resignation. They didn't even criticize anyone.

I don't see reason for fear either. If any of the anti-audit crowd here are employeess of the DNR, please know I'm not advocating for any of you to lose your job. I believe a lot of good can come of this, and will likely make your job easier. I've got problems at work too. I wish someone would come audit my department so they can see what we're working with.

[hockeybc69]

It would be really refreshing to just hear our DNR talk some truth.

Harvest down every year because of wind, rain, corn.... B S

Leslie this year said that the lower harvest isnt indicitive of the actual population of deer... B S

We have about a million deer going into the deer season(said every year for the last several years)... B S

I would have a lot more faith in them if they could just get off their little soapbox and admit some things just havent worked out so good..... So I support an audit because of their arrogance that they continue to spew to the masses. Unfortuneately many of you keep on buying the snake oil they are selling to you.

[creepworm]

I guess I dont understand why some of you are so afraid of an audit of the DNR. What the hell are you afraid of?? They have no oversight and they dont really answer to anybody. Is it just not conceivable to some of you idiots that things could be made better??

Is it cause its gonna take some funds and time to audit them?? We are $18 trillion in the hole as a country, I dont think it really matters what we do at the state level.

I don't see why the MDDI is so afraid that the DNR MIGHT go to a more liberal deer harvest next year.

And I am not afraid of a DNR audit, I just find it incredibly unnecessary. The DNR has done what it is able to do, lower antlerless tags. The MDDI is not happy on the baseless fear they MIGHT go back to liberal tags.

You are correct, the NATION is 18 trillion in debt. However, the nation is not paying for this, the state is. The state is required by law to have balanced books. Therefore, what you just said, is 100% senseless.

[PurpleFloyd]

Spew to the masses? They clearly stated that they have been working to reduce the herd from the numbers they had 10 years ago and now they are working to bring it back up. That is the same thing Iowa and Wisconsin did and the results are comparable as well.

If you understand an audit then you know it has no teeth and takes a while before any legislation gets passed. Working directly with the legislature and dnr gets faster results.

[SmellEsox]

Spew to the masses? They clearly stated that they have been working to reduce the herd from the numbers they had 10 years ago and now they are working to bring it back up. That is the same thing Iowa and Wisconsin did and the results are comparable as well.

If you understand an audit then you know it has no teeth and takes a while before any legislation gets passed. Working directly with the legislature and dnr gets faster results.

Read what you just wrote. If they knew what they were doing, they wouldn't need to be so drastic in bringing deer numbers up. They went way overboard and now tough winters have made it way worse than it should be. So did every state around us. DNR's went hog wild and declared war on deer. Now the hunters are crabbing all over the Midwest from MN to IA and KS to OH. MO DNR took the lead in their state and went more conservative. IA DNR tried to go more conservative a year ago but was overridden by the governor. Now they are more conservative also. MN only went conservative because of an outcry from hunters and a Commish that heard. Area managers still wanted to whack the feces out of them and still have liberal seasons. There needs to be a change in philosophy regarding deer management by our DNR. There needs to be more management concern for hunters.

[BuckSutherland]

And I am not afraid of a DNR audit, I just find it incredibly unnecessary. The DNR has done what it is able to do, lower antlerless tags. The MDDI is not happy on the baseless fear they MIGHT go back to liberal tags.

You are correct, the NATION is 18 trillion in debt. However, the nation is not paying for this, the state is. The state is required by law to have balanced books. Therefore, what you just said, is 100% senseless.

Do you or Purple Floyd hunt in the NE corner of the state?? Lets say from the Brainerd/Little Falls area north to the border and then east towards WI.

You think they did ALL THEY CAN?? With mindset no wonder the hunting is so pathetic.

And Purple, the legislature wont just take action against the DNR and Gov Goofy wont just sign it. If they actually went through an audit and had some recommendations for the politicians they might actually get on board. They will need to see evidence on paper of the ineptness before they take action.

[Don Brinkman]

Maybe minnesota deer hunters should gather together down town, wearing our blaze orange parkas, and lay down on interstate 35w maybe then the media will notice.

[O.T.C.]

Have read a lot about this topic for 2 years now, I'm not sure what some are hoping to hear, that you're right too many management tags or intensive harvest tags for a couple years to long, well it looks like they have adjusted that right ? I'm not sure other than what they did with bucks only, 1 deer areas, what can they do to bring the numbers back other than that other than taking your guaranteed buck license away from you and going to lottery with that, what do you want them to do, start an artificial insemination team, get every doe fawn bred ? Do you realize how many deer are killed each day by a booming wolf population while we sleep they are hunting 24/7 nearly and we never had wolves in area 240 the way we do now, I saw a lone male wolf recently near NYM,MN. That hurt our numbers more than anything the DNR did in most of my areas as most guys haven't shot a doe hardly since the 80's, some groups thin em hard sure, but many of us don't even lift the rifle if a doe fawn or yearling buck comes by in area 240 just talking the 30-40 guys I know and the lack of much shooting the past couple years, tough winters does will abort a fawn or both, somehow these does get bred so the bucks are around, I don't see any dry doe topics on here. Hope for mild spring weather as fat reserves dwindle along, this mild up is huge for them. Manage what you can your own hunting party and what's acceptable to harvest and manage your land. We all know there's corruption in many businesses so why bother with our DNR, the next hires could be worse or maybe better, but control what you can, talk to your neighbors, get onboard each season as to what your group plans to try to take according to tcams and scouting and things can get better quickly with decent Winters/Springs.

[SmellEsox]

Have read a lot about this topic for 2 years now, I'm not sure what some are hoping to hear, that you're right too many management tags or intensive harvest tags for a couple years to long, well it looks like they have adjusted that right ? I'm not sure other than what they did with bucks only, 1 deer areas, what can they do to bring the numbers back other than that other than taking your guaranteed buck license away from you and going to lottery with that, what do you want them to do, start an artificial insemination team, get every doe fawn bred ? Do you realize how many deer are killed each day by a booming wolf population while we sleep they are hunting 24/7 nearly and we never had wolves in area 240 the way we do now, I saw a lone male wolf recently near NYM,MN. That hurt our numbers more than anything the DNR did in most of my areas as most guys haven't shot a doe hardly since the 80's, some groups thin em hard sure, but many of us don't even lift the rifle if a doe fawn or yearling buck comes by in area 240 just talking the 30-40 guys I know and the lack of much shooting the past couple years, tough winters does will abort a fawn or both, somehow these does get bred so the bucks are around, I don't see any dry doe topics on here. Hope for mild spring weather as fat reserves dwindle along, this mild up is huge for them. Manage what you can your own hunting party and what's acceptable to harvest and manage your land. We all know there's corruption in many businesses so why bother with our DNR, the next hires could be worse or maybe better, but control what you can, talk to your neighbors, get onboard each season as to what your group plans to try to take according to tcams and scouting and things can get better quickly with decent Winters/Springs.

Pretty sure antlerless harvest has exceeded adult buck harvest in 240 for quite a few years in a row now. Maybe not this year, but last year over 2000 antlerless deer were killed, and less than 1600 bucks. You and your buddies might not be shooting does, but most everyone else must be. Antlerless harvest has far more impact on deer populations than wolves across the transition zone.

[O.T.C.]

I agree that it all came together at once, multiple antlerless tags just prior to the wolves coming in thick as ever where we're at in 240, people thought this deer population will sustain like this forever, winter/spring weather can't dodge that every year like some thought we might be a decade away from a severe one, they also foolishly got rid of zone 4 which only adds to the kill totals and more cross tagged deer and then muzzleloading which area 240 has the most licensed muzzy hunters in the state and guess what, I bet in archery it ranks near #1 as well. Throw that all together and you get what we've got, although even with all of that if I were surveyed, I'd say the 3 areas of 240 I Hunt in have good to very good deer numbers this year and right now, neighbors with prime land have seen tons of deer muzzleloading, talking 50-60 in about 6 sits and my land must have 20-30 on it, that's 100 between the 2 of us, one thing we don't have yet there is wolves, when we do that will really put a hurting on em big time, first ever confirmed wolf track in there was last winter, thankfully a loner.

[creepworm]

Maybe minnesota deer hunters should gather together down town, wearing our blaze orange parkas, and lay down on interstate 35w maybe then the media will notice.

Good luck with this. The MDDI can't even get 1% of mn deer hunters to sign an online petition.

[leechlake]

if we're going to do this lets do it in Waskish on Red Lake, go fishing afterward.

[Bureaucrat]

A few hundred signed a petition. 18,000 quit.

[PurpleFloyd]

Read what you just wrote. If they knew what they were doing, they wouldn't need to be so drastic in bringing deer numbers up. They went way overboard and now tough winters have made it way worse than it should be. So did every state around us. DNR's went hog wild and declared war on deer. Now the hunters are crabbing all over the Midwest from MN to IA and KS to OH. MO DNR took the lead in their state and went more conservative. IA DNR tried to go more conservative a year ago but was overridden by the governor. Now they are more conservative also. MN only went conservative because of an outcry from hunters and a Commish that heard. Area managers still wanted to whack the feces out of them and still have liberal seasons. There needs to be a change in philosophy regarding deer management by our DNR. There needs to be more management concern for hunters.

How can they possibly give the vocal minority of deer hunters what they want when they keep changing what they want?

For several years- and I can dredge threads for days to prove it- the push was to save yearlung bucks and in order to do that they openly promoted shooting a doe for the freezer. I can also dredge the threads where, in the name of herd health, the APR crowd promoted the 1:1 doe to buck ratio as a way to establish herd health and a balanced population due to taking a concept from QDMA that stated such without understanding the implications to the population of the herd in the State.

So, they got the does in the freezer that they were a ski g for and now you are upset.

Maybe you should go after these armchair biologists that don't understand the impact of promoting ideas that work in specific areas as universal solutions to complex problems.

The liberal notion of throwing more money and more regulation/ government involvement at a problem has proven to fail time after time.