New MN Deer Advocacy Group

[Bureaucrat]

The movement has grown up! If you are concerned about the direction of deer hunting in Minnesota, a new group is headed to the table to stand up for the future of deer and deer hunting in Minnesota.

http://www.mndeerdensity.com/

Simply hit that link to go there. If you are link-shy, type it into your browser as it is listed there. Once there, be sure to sign up for email updates on the "Contact Who" page. Nobody is asking for money. All that is needed is your attention and support to understand the situation we're in and what you can do to help ensure we have a future in deer hunting.

[PurpleFloyd]

Grown up? Looks like more rehashing of the same tired agenda that has been hashed out and refuted for the past year.

Brooks is doing no favors for the deer hunting community at large.

Do us a favor and focus on habitat, understand that the deer hunting fraternity is a big tent and that the current MDDI talking points alienate more than they recruit and let's work on things that can unite the community and not just drive wedges.

[Jameson]

Thanks for posting Bureaucrat!

[creepworm]

Well, isn't this cute.

[Farmsfulltime]

A very correct thought join together and consider all sides rather than I want it my way and no one else matters . The deer populations in Minnesota will never be allowed to reach the levels that some advocate for many reasons and rhetoric outside of reasonable will be dismissed as fringe , audit supporters 560 and change and no new recruits for weeks now . Even if the stakeholder meetings reach any thing near agreement in the groups the mddi crowd will still cry foul such as the numbers are bad , ect Join the DNR in the process and work for positive change within the system we have

[TattooedHunter]

Why split the hunters more? It doesn't help to have 15 different groups that divide everyone up. We need a single, large and strong group to fight through this. Take GOCRA for example, a single unifying group fighting for a general common goal.

[MJ1657]

It's all about personal agendas.

[Bureaucrat]

Believe me, none of us have any dreams of starting our own deer organization. We tried to get other conservation groups involved and they were not interested in the cause. We have one goal, and that is to restore and stabilize the deer herd to a sustainable harvest level that the DNR said was possible years ago.

[creepworm]

We tried to get other conservation groups involved and they were not interested in the cause.

Shouldn't that be some sort of sign?

[PurpleFloyd]

We tried to get other conservation groups involved and they were not interested in the cause.

[Bureaucrat]

If that's the case, I'm outta the loop on it.

[creepworm]

It seems to me the mddi was started by Brooks as a path to APR. correct me if I am wrong but didn't he have an exchange posted by getanet with smsmith on another forum where the plan was to get the DNR to bring herd numbers up so it was more likely APR would pass?

I might have to dredge that post to make sure.

That is correct. Smsith told Brooks he would "tote the party line" when it came to increasing the population to get APR's implemented.

[PurpleFloyd]

If that's the case, I'm outta the loop on it.

[Farmsfulltime]

Thanks for the link that explains a lot of whats been said on this forum in the last year or so , I forwarded it to leslie at the DNR to try to enlighten her on the agenda at play . She can read it herself and reach her own conclusions

[delcecchi]

The movement has grown up! If you are concerned about the direction of deer hunting in Minnesota, a new group is headed to the table to stand up for the future of deer and deer hunting in Minnesota.

But, said the Lorax, who speaks for the trees?

[jentz]

Great complain about deer! Do they need land to live on?It's disheartening watching it go,not only to small partial owners but corporations who rape it!

http://www.startribune.com/local/290436161.html

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

Thanks for the link that explains a lot of whats been said on this forum in the last year or so , I forwarded it to leslie at the DNR to try to enlighten her on the agenda at play . She can read it herself and reach her own conclusions

As if she isnt very aware of the MDDI.... haaa...

She has no conclusions, because she simply is a puppet and has no clue what the heck she is doing.

[delcecchi]

Great complain about deer! Do they need land to live on?It's disheartening watching it go,not only to small partial owners but corporations who rape it!

http://www.startribune.com/local/290436161.html

And what kind of corporation is it that the strib is worried about? Large paper companies? Hmmm.

[PurpleFloyd]

And what kind of corporation is it that the strib is worried about? Large paper companies? Hmmm.

That would be ironic since Glen Taylor owns it as well as one of the biggest printing conglomerates in the Midwest.

[Jameson]

Interesting how some folks think that people never change. Change is the only constant.

Surely if someone dug deep enough posts from me ragging on spearfisherman could be found. Now I have bought a spear license for a number of years and see it as just another way to go fishing.

Keep digging and you could even find pro-APR stuff from me. Now I argue against them most every chance I can get. Many folks now kind of find my name as a reminder for a buck lottery if anything.

Currently I despise feeding deer and our separate deer seasons. Those things probably will change in the future too as I gain more knowledge.

Suppose I look at someone who never changes as someone not learning.....for whatever that reason may be.

[Bureaucrat]

You know, I thought long and hard about the APR concerns mentioned earlier in the thread. I've followed the thread throughout the weekend and decided to sit back and really think this through. Here's where I ended up.

I have known Brooks and Smith via the internet and some phone conversations for about a year now. I can't speak exactly to what their beliefs are top to bottom. But I'm not concerned. MDDI should be a big tent movement. We should have APR guys in it, just like we should have anti-APR guys in it. We should have pro-drives and anti-drives advocates as well. We should have venison guys and love to be in the woods guys. Pro-deluxe blind guys and anti-deluxe blind guys. Pro-scoped muzzle loaders and anti-scoped muzzle loaders.

All these factions should be united in their desire to restore and stabilize the deer herd. If/when we achieve that, I'd look forward to falling back to other smaller conversations around deer hunting. The important thing to me is that we have deer so we can continue to debate how we hunt deer, so long as there are deer to hunt and people and kids still interesting in hunting them.

[BRULEDRIFTER]

All these factions should be united in their desire to restore and stabilize the deer herd. If/when we achieve that, I'd look forward to falling back to other smaller conversations around deer hunting. The important thing to me is that we have deer so we can continue to debate how we hunt deer, so long as there are deer to hunt and people and kids still interesting in hunting them.

Cha-Ching!!!! We have a winner!

[smsmith]

You know, I thought long and hard about the APR concerns mentioned earlier in the thread. I've followed the thread throughout the weekend and decided to sit back and really think this through. Here's where I ended up.

I have known Brooks and Smith via the internet and some phone conversations for about a year now. I can't speak exactly to what their beliefs are top to bottom. But I'm not concerned. MDDI should be a big tent movement. We should have APR guys in it, just like we should have anti-APR guys in it. We should have pro-drives and anti-drives advocates as well. We should have venison guys and love to be in the woods guys. Pro-deluxe blind guys and anti-deluxe blind guys. Pro-scoped muzzle loaders and anti-scoped muzzle loaders.

All these factions should be united in their desire to restore and stabilize the deer herd. If/when we achieve that, I'd look forward to falling back to other smaller conversations around deer hunting. The important thing to me is that we have deer so we can continue to debate how we hunt deer, so long as there are deer to hunt and people and kids still interesting in hunting them.

I've said it before...those factions are what the MDDI was and is composed of. QDMA guys, MBI guys, MWA guys, MDHA guys, local sportsmen's groups guys....etc.

The APR comments regarding myself and others have been brought up here ad nauseum...I've explained my current and previous stance on them. Not much sense in doing it all over again.

[SmellEsox]

Just curious. Would you guys that don't trust MDDI support a different organization fighting for this cause?

[PurpleFloyd]

Just curious. Would you guys that don't trust MDDI support a different organization fighting for this cause?

What cause? If the cause is as the MDDI was conceived which was a stepping stone towards another agenda then no.The audit idea itself is no platform to achieve what you are looking for either as it is inefficient and unpredictable.

The deer population will rebound as long as nature allows it to with the plan that is already in place.

As far as in the future,the best thing that can be done is to try to educate hunters that it isn't about the rack size. back before this MDDI thing was launched I was on here arguing with the pro APR crowd that the mindset of letting small bucks walk in favor of filling the freezer with does was wrong. It seems there are more people now who understand that but it was the vocal minority of antler hunters who pushed this without understanding the implications.

As to the comment above about people changing, this has nothing to do with someone changing their mind. The concept of the MDDI was developed as a tool to get APR implemented plain and simple and it was not even a good plan at that. The time from talking APR to the MDDI happened in a matter of weeks, not months or years and was documented as a means to an end, not as a change in core beliefs.