Comments for the DNR

[BLACKJACK]

The Strib was saying that the DNR is going to have some informational/comment sessions around the state on some issues. Heres what I sent to the DNR, I was wondering what others thoughts were on issues facing the DNR.

-------------

I probably won’t make it to one of your info meetings but here are my comments:

1) Pheasant limits – 2 to 3.

- I say no. As an avid pheasant hunter, I like to see more roosters around later in the season, why get more of them slaughtered in the first two ‘easy’ weeks of the season?

2) Pheasant possession – Yes raise the possession limit. If you’re an avid pheasant hunter and go out 4-5 times a week and have some success, you have to ‘work’ at cooking some up in order to stay legal. I’d like to be able to enjoy my pheasants at my leisure, taking them out of the freezer when I have time and enjoying them.

3) Conibear traps – restrict them, especially the big ones!!! As a guy who almost had his dog caught in a big conibear trap, I don’t want to see my dog – or anyones dog – caught in one. Restrict the big ones to water sets and nothing on land, even up north in the grouse woods, that a dog can get there head in.

4) Bows cut from 40 to 30 pounds. As a bow hunter, I want to cut down any bad publicity and I think that 30 pounds would cut down your margin of error; it would have to be a perfect heart/lung shot. I say no.

5) One dollar surcharge on deer license to pay for food shelf donation. I say yes, it would be good publicity. But only for deer processing, not any other deer management/predation costs.

6) Deer regulations, especially point restrictions. I’m against point restrictions, in the farm lands where I slug hunt, that four point might be the only deer you see. Don’t let a vocal minority, the trophy rack hunters, dictate our deer hunting regs.

[BobT]

Quote:

---

4) Bows cut from 40 to 30 pounds. As a bow hunter, I want to cut down any bad publicity and I think that 30 pounds would cut down your margin of error; it would have to be a perfect heart/lung shot. I say no.

---

I can agree with all of your statements accept I wonder about this one. I don't necessarily disagree but I have a question.

The regulation setting the minimum draw weight was set when arrow speed was considerably less than it is today. With the advances in bow technology arrow speeds have increase considerably over the years not to mention the improvements made in arrow and broadhead designs as well. I don't know the typical specifics but I would guess that a 30# bow today probably sends an arrow faster than a 40# bow of just 20 years ago. That does seem to support lessening the draw weight.

Secondly, lower draw weight would mean less to hold and I'm thinking, improved shot placement. Coupled with the improved arrow speeds and better broadhead designs this may compensate for any lack of impact energy.

Third, lower draw weight might mean more hunters able to participate. I realize that 40# is not a tremendous weight to hold but it might be for some.

Bob

[Powerstroke]

The consideration for a 30lb weight limit comes from trying to get more "youth" size bows to qualify for hunting. What is known now about kinetic energy proves that a properly equipped 30 lb bow can hunt deer.

We all know that you can wound a deer shooting 80lbs if you make a bad shot, so proper shot placement is always important. More energy doesn't mean more kills if you shoot poorly.

[poutpro]

I would sure hate to see 220 connibear traps made illegal on land. They are the main way that I catch raccoon, and I have never had a dog caught in a trap. I beleive that it is a very rare occurence, and that there are many other things that kill more dogs that 220 traps. I think that a lot of trappers would be upset if they were banned, they aren't really the right size for water sets. Too small for beaver, too big for mink.

[BLACKJACK]

How big is a 220?

[loupepsi]

Very well stated

[sportfish]

I like how people say they have to shoot that fork horn, becuse if they had a point restriction they wouldnt shot a buck. Well next year that fork would be leagal and would be bigger horns and bigger body(more meat). Just shoot a doe if you can't stand not getting meat!!

[poutpro]

A 220 is 7" X 7". It is possible that your dog got caught in a 330, which currently is illegal to have set on land. I think that the trapper education requirement will help a lot to teach trappers how to avoid these accidental catches.

[dillon]

I hate the idea of antler point restrictions. Even though in recent years we have been passing up a lot of smaller 8 or 10 pt. racks, I still think each hunter should be able to make their own decision about what is big enough for him or her to shoot. Some hunters don't have as much time to spend in the woods as others and shooting a smaller buck might be a success for them.

I also think that a lot of hunters are using the perceived lack of big deer as an excuse for their lack of success. The truth is there are good numbers of big deer in the woods. Just don't expect it to be as easy as it looks on TV.

[J48jake]

Quote:

---

3) Conibear traps – restrict them, especially the big ones!!! As a guy who almost had his dog caught in a big conibear trap, I don’t want to see my dog – or anyones dog – caught in one. Restrict the big ones to water sets and nothing on land, even up north in the grouse woods, that a dog can get there head in.

---

Another issue that boils down to people not knowing anything about the topic and using the dreaded R-word. 220's are a great tool for the trapper and a lot of pheasant egg seeking predators are trapped in them every year. There are many other options to reduce the unwanted animal catches in the 220. On public land they could be flagged with a certain color ribbon to indicate a trap has been set there or there are ways a trapper can "dog proof" there traps. Personally I trap on my own land and I think I should be able to us 220's because they really are a useful tool to the trapper. I am not telling pheasant hunters what kind of gun they have to use or what kind of dog they have to hunt with.

Just my 2 cents

[poutpro]

That is a good point about the eggs. Think how many pheasant and duck eggs will be saved by all of the raccoon and skunks that were caught with 220 traps.

[walleye101]

Good point. That will make the guy carrying his dead pheasant dog back to his truck feel a whole lot better!

[kgpcr4]

I sure hope they dont put a point restriction on. THat would suck in my mind. Alot of people dont have the time to scout and hunt alot and any buck to them is a trophy so i am dead set against it. I know one land owner who told me "the day the tell me i cant shoot any buck is when i start gun hunting in October" I would aslo like to see the pheasant limit stay right where it is

[Jameson]

Quote:

---

...trapper. I am not telling pheasant hunters what kind of gun they have to use...

---

Very old law. No hunting anything with shotgun larger than ten gage. Hard to find one these days, but don't go shooting pheasants with a cannon loaded with shot please.

[J48jake]

Quote:

---

Good point. That will make the guy carrying his dead pheasant dog back to his truck feel a whole lot better!

---

Like I said, I support some sort of flagging or marking of traps on PUBLIC land, Any dog worth anything will listen to you when you call it back away from the marked trap.

[Scott K]

To simplefy things why doesnt dnr just close buck for a year, and have a doe only. That would make all bucks bigger, and thin out this so called over populated deer population. Im sure there are several reasons not to do this, but it would work. Maybe do it once every 10 years.

[dstrey]

To ban an effective way of controlling predators just doesnt make any sense to me, a dog would have to try pretty hard to crawl into a 220. I havent trapped for a long while but i support it in every way. More traps out there = less predators = more pheasants.

As far as not allowing anyone to take a buck for an entire year. That would cost the dnr tons of money in lost license sales. Where I hunt many people go hunting for a set of antlers, i dont think they would even buy a license for a doe. I shoot at the first deer I have a decent shot at and if it were a very nice buck, I would be fairly [PoorWordUsage]ed if I had to let him walk by.

[poutpro]

Why is it that pheasant hunters think that their sport and their dogs are more important than any other sport? A lot of people trap for a seasonal income, and by taking away the 220, it would cut down on their income. If something is bad for the pheasant hunters, well I guess it should just be banned.

[poutpro]

I would actually like to see how many dogs actually get caught in 220s each year. I have talked to quite a few trappers, and all that use 220's have said that they have never had a dog in one. Maybe we should not allow vehicles to drive down gravel roads when they see someone hunting pheasants in the adjacent section because their dog could get hit.

[walleye101]

Poutpro,

By your logic, trappers should have the right to make any type of set anywhere if it is effective at taking predators and provides the trapper a source of income. If it is indiscriminant set that kills non-target animals as well, I guess that is just part of the business. Heck, trappers loose a few traps every season, hunters should just expect that they may loose a dog now and then, just part of the business.

I am a trapper myself and member of the MN trappers association. It is just your type of narrow minded logic that will likely mean the end of the sport for the rest of us responsible trappers.

No one is suggesting that 220's be outlawed. They are a safe and efficient tool if used correctly. That is not setting them in baited cubbies where hunters with dogs have every right to be. If that is the only set you can catch racoon in you should invest in some trapping lessons.

[poutpro]

Have you read any of the posts? Obvoisly not, people ARE saying that they want to outlaw the 220. Also, did I ever say that I think traps should be set in any manner? The only thing that I am saying is that the pheasant hunters think that all game laws should be formed to be best for only pheasant hunters. Also, did I ever say that the 220 was the only way that I catch raccoons? I don't know how you are coming to all of these false conclusions. The few dogs that get caught in traps are being caught by those that set traps irresponsibly or illegally. Why do you think a law is going to change this? I beleive that trapper education is the answer to the problem.

[walleye101]

Yes I have been reading the posts. I just went back and re-read all the posts on this topic and only the first post mentioned restrictions on the use of conibers. I did not see any post advocating for outlawing them.

If we cannot have a civil conversation about some reasonable restrictions on where they should be allowed and what type of set is more of less dangerous, that is when you end up with laws proposed to outlaw them.

[J48jake]

I am with poutpro, I would still like to see actually stats on dogs getting caught in 220's. And I don’t want to hear any sob stories about someone’s dog getting trapped in a 220. A 220 is only 7x7 but I am sure it won’t be long till it follows the path of the 330 and is banned on land. There is just more pheasant hunters then there is trappers and unfortunately politics is all about numbers and money.

[kaz2611]

im not a bow hunter so not sure the impact a lesser draw weight would have like stated arrow speed has increased alot since the 40lb draw weight was introduced and i agree that for some they may be a little more stable for a cleaner shot and if lowering it to 30 lbs will enable more youth to hunt THAT WOULD BE EXCELLENT .

point limit : lets see that deer is blazing by you at 30 mph can you count how many points it has? with proper deer management there is no need for this law. a bigger rack doesnt mean the deer has more meat

banning the 220 im not a trapper but i have experienced running a trap line with a friend some years back i really enjoyed it peta has been beating down on the trapper for years and now sounds almost same with pheasant hunters yeah i agree if my dog stepped in a trap id be [PoorWordUsage]ed off i dont think this happens alot with hunting dogs that are actually out hunting pheasants with their owners as much as it does to dogs that have been dumped off on side of the road because theya re no longer wanted heres an idea for pheasant hunters if your hunting private land ask the owner if he traps and if so ask if he has sets in the area you are planning on hunting with your dog. for public land no real good solution there other than most trappers like sets near culverts or on fence lines so maybe be cautious in these areas. trappers trap alot of racoons and skunks along with fox and coyotes all of which love pheasants and pheasant eggs. take away trapper and soon the pheasants will follow. BTW i enjoy hunting pheasants more so than any other game outside of deer.

[Jameson]

point limit--not needed. Big bucks are taken on public land every year in MN. Get out there and scout and hunt harder.

My comment to the DNR:

I just finished guessing my 2007 license fees for hunting and fishing. $233.50 Thanks for the bargain! I think thats really cheap for all the time I spend doing those things. Oh, and the full freezer of venison.