What do you think?

[ANYFISH]

With Minnesota winters and vast woodlands (especially northern minnesota) deer have special stresses. This also applies to all northern deer herds. Nutrition is the number one limiting factor of antler growth of 1 1/2 year old deer. As these deer enter thier first winter having a "short" growing season. They enter early summer nutrionally deficant and lower on testosterone because they are still juvinals. In our forested regions high quality nutrition is limited compared to farmlands. Thus exipiting less antler growth. Spikes in high quality farmland may be more likely to be genetically insuperior. We may see more spike in MN because most of us hunt in the forested regions that have limiting nutrition and winter stresses that cause a lowering of testosterone leading into antler growth. My .02

[Thorn]

Heck, I'd go as far as to say overpopulation is hurting the habitat tremendously. But as studies from major Universities have shown [speaking solely on antler genetics] it's the time of stress that shows which deer are inferior.

The growing number of antlerless tags is key facto that proves this.

And this year may be one of those stressful years as far as habitat goes. As of today the MN Corn crops are still behind on being seeded in. I mean like nearly 45% behind the average.

[B. Amish]

 Originally Posted By: Thorn

On the free range studied deer in TX, it was on the Kerr WMA I believe.

you are close...

it was on the "Kerr Wildlife Management Area Deer PENS"...

sounds like they were inside a fenced off area to me.

the study you are referring to also states "The does influence antler production as well."

How in the world do we selectively harvest the genetically inferior females?

[BLACKJACK]

 Originally Posted By: 96trigger

I've actually been thinking alot about this thread. It always makes me nervous to think about land leases etc.. I want my son to be able to hunt just like I did. We hunt primarily private land but keeping that is getting soooo expensive (but that might change with the economy). Certain luxeries like having recrational land might come to an end. However, it could open the door to more leasing, especially if it gets tight for everyone.

I did't think a whole lot differently than many of you. I wanted a trophy buck. I hadn't see anything of any size in ten years of hunting, however, I oten saw other people shooting nice bucks. I'd see then at the local bars and in outdoor publications. The question I asked myself is what are they doing differently than me. Why are they getting the big deer and I am not, not "we should all let little bucks go so I can continue to be an average sportsman and stumble across one". Instead, I got serious about it. I read publications and books on whitetail hunting. I did all I could to eliminate scent. I pay attention to the wind, I move stands regularly, and I put in time, time, time. I don't walk out on opening day, climb into the same old tree stand and hope I see a deer anymore. I scout, scout again, and scout some more. My early season bowhunting is almost always just scouting with a weapon. Since starting this 5 years ago I first started seeing an increase in the number of deer I saw. In the last three years, I have had at least one shot at Pope and Young deer (all on private land bordering public). Only one shot, I connected on 1 out of 3. To me, thats what its all about. Spending the time, putting in the work, and waiting for that one shot, the payoff of all the scouting, time, sweat, and practice. I know that my area has big bucks and that some do not, but if you see or know of big bucks taken in your area, ask yourself, what are they doing that you aren't? In fact, ask them, most of the time, they are more than willing to help.

I didn't wait for the DNR to enforce QDM so I could go out and shoot one. I decided that I was going to work for it. I think that alot of hunters have a sense of entitlement. Some don't have the time, but they shouldn't complain either, they should be happy with what they get. There were times that I started wondering if it was worth it, but after that one shot, all those questions get answered.

Good post 96trigger!!!!!! Especially this line "I didn't wait for the DNR to enforce QDM so I could go out and shoot one. I decided that I was going to work for it."

Its been my feeling all along that too many hunters want the DNR to mandate big bucks instead of going out and working for them. And they are there. I get the Outdoor News and week after week after week there are pictures of big bucks. And yet people whine about the deer hunting.

Go out there and HUNT one down, don't expect the DNR to tie one to a tree for you.

[BLACKJACK]

[quote name='ThornThe MN deer density has been found to be prohibiting certain species of plants from growing..period. The deer in MN are wiping out the habitat' date=' per studies from Matt Norton and University of Minnesota forest ecologist Lee Frelich.

There are also studies by the UMN showing that the genetics of superior bucks are declining due to overpopulation stress. [/quote']

Thorn, I think you need to do some more research. There may be some areas in MN that are overpopulated but there are vast areas in SW and Western MN where deer are tough to come by. Thats why its tough for the DNR to come up with a one size fits all deer hunt. Restricting the doe harvest DOES help the population in Zone 4.

[surewood]

I think the majority of deer hunters on this site hunt hard and put in the time. Because I would like to see a healthier herd and bigger bucks and I beleive that it can be done does'nt make any less of a hunter. It makes me a concerned hunter. I'd like to see the trend of overpopulation (in some areas) and small bucks start to head in the other direction. Just look at the record books, MN use to put out big deer at a higher rate than anyone and as a Minnesotan that makes me proud of our habitat and land. But as of the last couple decades we keep falling down the rankings. Whether you hunt for meat, trophy's, tradition, it looks like we are headed in the wrong direction for quality deer. I know were for the most part fine right now but what about the future?

[Thorn]

 Originally Posted By: BLACKJACK

[quote name='ThornThe MN deer density has been found to be prohibiting certain species of plants from growing..period. The deer in MN are wiping out the habitat' date=' per studies from Matt Norton and University of Minnesota forest ecologist Lee Frelich.

There are also studies by the UMN showing that the genetics of superior bucks are declining due to overpopulation stress.

Thorn, I think you need to do some more research. There may be some areas in MN that are overpopulated but there are vast areas in SW and Western MN where deer are tough to come by. Thats why its tough for the DNR to come up with a one size fits all deer hunt. Restricting the doe harvest DOES help the population in Zone 4.

[/quote']

so you're saying that to use a professor's word with some history kniowledge in the feild is bunk?...LOL

PLEASE-

Remember the post you're refering to was in habitat carrying capacity

Lee Frelich, Director, The University of Minnesota Center for Hardwood Ecology, University of MN

“Forest Decline Syndrome Caused by Deer and Earthworms”

Lee E. Frelich is the founder and Director of the University of Minnesota Center for Hardwood Ecology, St.Paul, and Senior Member of the Graduate Faculty, in the Forestry, Ecology and Conservation Biology programs. Frelich is the author of more than 50 scientific publications on forest ecology and is listed among the top 1% of scientists in the world by the Institute for Scientific Information,

[tedl]

Thorn, your posts are so scientific, I can't keep up

I think the moral of the story is shoot more deer!!!!

[Thorn]

 Originally Posted By: B. Amish

 Originally Posted By: Thorn

On the free range studied deer in TX, it was on the Kerr WMA I believe.

you are close...

it was on the "Kerr Wildlife Management Area Deer PENS"...

sounds like they were inside a fenced off area to me.

the study you are referring to also states "The does influence antler production as well."

How in the world do we selectively harvest the genetically inferior females?

Yep, pens.

Only way to start QDM is with a certain population of deer, a total number. Then improve from there.

As far as does being inferior the test showed results from both spike and forked bucks as followes,

The doe carries 50% of the genetic material for antler development. In the deer pens, some does consistently produce small antlered offspring and some consistently produced large antlered offspring. When spike-antlered males were bred, the off spring were often spikes at 1 and 2 years of age with a few being spikes at 3. When females from forked-antlered sires were bred to fork-antlered males, the offspring were often large antlered.

As far as what to do, I say bring down the population period to help habitat sustain deer without dire stress, including being able to withstand droughts and severe winter kill.

As of the past years winters here in MN have only resulted in killing a few car batteries..LOL

[Thorn]

 Originally Posted By: tedl

Thorn, your posts are so scientific, I can't keep up

I think the moral of the story is shoot more deer!!!!

Heck yeah!

Let's go huntin! This thread has me stoked to start the BBQ grill.

[tedl]

[jerkbait]

 Originally Posted By: tedl

Thorn, your posts are so scientific, I can't keep up

I think the moral of the story is shoot more deer!!!!

Heck yeah!!! Lets go get em, BROWN IS DOWN!!! They are such tasty morsels!!!

[BLACKJACK]

Thorne, I don't care who you're quoting or how many letters they have behind their names, your post made it sound like MN had too many deer and that the only answer was to shoot more deer. I was just pointing out that there are large areas of MN where that isn't so, where deer are still hard to find and doe permits are necesary.

In some area of zone 4 the DNR found out that the All Season license was not a good thing, that people were shooting too many does, that the deer population had dipped too far.

In the past, if a group of deer ran by me, I always used to shoot the biggest doe in the bunch because I like venison but now that the deer population has dipped down, I pass on the big doe because she'll be the one next spring that drops twins or triplets, and I like to see deer, whether its hunting season or during the summertime.

[Thorn]

well if you can't find 'em do what Roger Raglin says..If you're not seeing big bucks get up and move..Trust me, or Dr Lee, Tom, Dick and Harry or the DNR. They're there.

I read somewhere [prolly the STRIB] that parents were shooting their kids's deer in Zone 4. Take a kid with ya and not just their tag.

Why is the DNR going to extend the hunting days in Zone 4 this year?

I like to use my unequivocal tones based on scientific sound studies and practice what I preach.

Heck I lived in TX for 40 years, did I see deer there..hardly.

I move here for the recreation and have enjoyed it emensley.

What is the DNR goal as of 2008 for the MN deer population?

It'd be a whole lot better if they'ed extend firearm seasons.

And yes, you're right not all places contain the same amount of deer. I never said that, point being was habitat in MN is being wrecked and some species of plants in some areas are being devoured into non existance. Then what? it certaintly will be less sustaining for QDM........... right? Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not.

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

A realignment of permit areas in northern Minnesota was also proposed, causing zone 4 permit areas north of U.S. Highway 10 to become part of zone 2. This would create one continuous nine-day season instead of the current split seasons of two and four days. Forested permit areas 205, 211, 214, 283, and 284 in zone 2 would be moved to zone 1, creating a 16-day season. In order to further increase deer management opportunities in the Twin Cities area, the DNR proposed a metro deer zone in permit areas 228 and 337. The firearm season in this zone would extend from the start of the general season to the end of the 3B season (23 consecutive days).

[ANYFISH]

Thorn is that realignment info from the DNR. I live 214 and it had just changed from zone 4 a couple years ago and is south/west of hwy 10. Lots of woods but not large expanses of forest. I would be agianst a 16 day season here, at least for now.

[00rowe]

I hunt in 214 and if there was a 16 day season, some areas would be completely wiped out of deer. The main reason for this, low income families that shoot as many deer as possible, this includes amish, I personally know of an area east of Bertha a few miles that 35 deer were taken by amish hunters in 2 square miles, and they weren't the only ones hunting there. It probably wouldn't help "trophy" hunters out either seems like they disappear after 1st weekend and the pressure ramps up.

[Thorn]

Speaking of Amish being resourcful, I need someone to help me make a gun cabinet.

[Thorn]

 Originally Posted By: ANYFISH

Thorn is that realignment info from the DNR. I live 214 and it had just changed from zone 4 a couple years ago and is south/west of hwy 10. Lots of woods but not large expanses of forest. I would be agianst a 16 day season here, at least for now.

Yes,

There was a public input meeting a few months ago specifically for that area. A little over 100 people attended. According to DNR official Lou Cornaceli [sp] the extended days will also allow for a better hunting experience and will not have any adverse effects on the deer herd.

Although, a few well placed shots might have some kind of effect on some of 'em.

I'm all for the pursuit of happiness.

[00rowe]

Thorn, I know a guy just east of Bertha that can make anything, he has done a lot of work for family and is very nice, not sure how to get in contact with him being without a phone but I know where he lives if you're interested.

[jvjohnson]

so you guys are saying that if i pass on a doe with the thught that that buck might be comming soon after IM A BAD HUNTER.

[SDbowhunter]

I strongly support QDM when it is made an individual decision on quality land able to sustain large deer population.

I have shot 2 bucks in my life my first spike and a small 6 pointer. My brother and I have not shot a small buck for 7 years. I have seen and missed a few big ones. Hunting gets better every year. We try to shoot for bucks 18" wide or ultimately a 150 class deer or bigger.

I have let many bucks go that the average minnesotan would shoot. Thats fine. Everyones trophy is differnt. Every year we get our fill of doe's either bowhunting or with the rifle. I get as much excitement shooting a doe as I do a small buck. I realized at the age of 15 that QDM is real. My brother and I were the youngest in our hunting party to start and now everyone has increased their standards and expectations.

For me there is no point in shooting small bucks. I understand the idea that you want to fill your freezer with meat. I think many people that hunt similar quality areas I do would realize the benefits of QDM.

Typically I will see at least 15 deer during the course of the season and the oppurtunities for that once in lifetime buck are just to great to use that tag on little buck that maybe the buck of a lifetime the next year.

I am against legislation for the earn a buck, with the understanding that the fist buck someone shoots, or a small deer taken in a certain situation, or the deer of an aging hunter are all trophys of an indescribable size.

People who support QDM need to convince their nieghbors, friends, and family. It come down to if you like to hunt deer or do you like to shoot deer. Many deer hunters are just deer shooters.

For me its about challenging my skills, showing determination, and following what I think is the right thing to do in my situations.