Moving the Firearm Season

[FISHINGURU]

count me in fellas....even though we like to debate/argue/disagree sometimes i'd still hang with any of ya and talk some huntin and fishin!

[Big Dave2]

This could shape up to be an interesting group..............we probably might as well be sitting in a fish house while we discuss all the world's problems over a sarsaparilla.

[Shoot2Kill]

I agree there.....although we might have a good ol [PoorWordUsage] match here online I wouldn't hesitate to shake every hand that has posted in this post and tip back a golden soda with you. We could fix the MN deer problem for sure.

[BeezeHound]

Right on! I'm sure after a couple hours of hitting the suds we could all come to some sort of comprimise, and have a good time doing it.

[Musky Buck]

Hey, I'm with ya to guys, you better believe I'd shake all your hands and appreciate everything you guys have taught me and I do see our deer season way differently. Ice fishing and Dave I want you for a whist partner, we'll rotate 2 houses x 4 teams and have a few root beer barrels. MB We'll call it instead of HSO HSOL- Hot shots of liquor ! Merry Christmas to each of you ! It's my hope that each of you and everyone you care about have the best holiday season you've ever had, hope it goes by slowly for all.

[propster]

I was prepared for several of you to go on the offensive again, but Big Dave, your latest post convinced me you can't be too bad a guy after all. Well done. Let's hope that day comes sooner than later, so we still have a chance to see more mature bucks, if not for me, then for my kid and yours.

[Musky Buck]

I only want to add shoot to kill that combined, ND population 700,000 and Iowa's population, 3 million, MN still has 2 million more people than Iowa and ND combined. I would guess a state in the midwest that has a lot less people in it probably has better hunting opportunities. Picture North Dakota with the same population of people as MN, really try to picture that, can you imagine the loss of quality habitat, the amount of deer license sales, the amount of vehicles on the road. Throw in about 84,000 square miles of water like MN has, neither state has a major metropolitan area like Minneapolis-St.Paul. I guess it's just hard for me to compare the Dakota's and Iowa to MN. Now Wisc. is a different story with a lot more deer hunters than MN, seems like the whole state has great habitat and is fairly similar. They have some killer counties that really produce, but overall they saw a 20 % decrease in registered deer this year. Certainly MN has the potential to do better in regards to mature bucks, but with us shooting dead the entire deer population every 4 years, meaning we take about 300,000 deer per season, and more opportunities like buying all 3 seasons, and most are tightly lipped about the taking of mature bucks in MN. This and that and a million other things I know. But, good luck in ND and Iowa, where the land hasn't been as subdivided as MN properties, where there isn't a stand on every 20 acres, or a lake you have to drive all the way around or a road or county road or highway criss crossing through or around lots of sections in MN. You will have a more costly less people kind of a hunt no doubt. Merry X-mas and Happy New Year to all !

[Shoot2Kill]

I agree on the population thing regarding the two states....that is why I'm heading there and not watching the squirrels in MN. More opportunities to have a closer encounter with something other than a fork or basket rack. The ratio of bigger bucks in those states compared to the overall deer population is higher, thus increasing your chances of success on a mature deer.

It's funny you posted about ND...my buddy up there just texted not more than 20 minutes ago...he's been on stand for an hour and has seen 24 deer....6 bucks, 2 shooters...out in broad daylight..all heading towards the corn (picked - not chisel plowed) before the weather comes back again. I'd give my left nut to see numbers like that here at any active food source.

[Joe15]

I say that they move it back to like when Iowa has theirs. All the bucks are done breeding so all the good genes will be out there. So now they are going and bedding down all day. Well most slug hunters push groves anyway so that wouldn't change. So I say move it back

[skee0025]

I support and will continue to support the DNR as long as they manage for a healthy herd using biologically sound methods. The day they stop managing for the health of the herd and start managing for "Trophys", well all I can say is I will do what I think is right...legal or not. I don't know how many of you remember hunting in the late 70's early 80's but you have infinately more opportunities to havest deer now then you ever had back then. I remember going years without seeing deer let alone getting one. Now we have people that want to limit hunting opportunites so THEY can get what they want. You want to move the season back...great lets do it, You want to Legislate QMD we're gonna have problems.

[eye1000us]

The whole basis of qdm is to create a healthy herd. A herd that isnt over or under populated and has a wide range of deer ages. Too many are focused on the "trophy" aspect of qdm. Mature deer , yes often trophies , are a by product of a healthy, well balanced deer herd. If we want a biologically healthy herd then we need deer of all ages. By shooting the majority of the young deer our herd will be dominated by young immature deer from year to year.

And yes I remeber the 70's and 80's.

[archerystud]

A healthy herd is one with a healthy buck/doe ratio. If MN would promote less bucks being shot we would have a more healthy ratio.

I remember the 70's and 80's as well. I also remember the REAL winters when the winter kills impacted the deer numbers for the following year.

[Joe15]

Ya what ever happended to everyone loving the hunt now its not very fun unless its a monster

[LOTWSvirgin]

Ya what ever happended to everyone loving the hunt now its not very fun unless its a monster

Thats Hittng it on the head Its about tradition. I have a couple good bucks that I have taken. But there worth nothing if you have to fight about if its big enough old enough. If you move the season back You will all be mad about the crappy weather. How many of you lked the weaher this year? Move the season thats what you will have.

[Big Dave2]

A healthy herd is one with a healthy buck/doe ratio. If MN would promote less bucks being shot we would have a more healthy ratio.

I remember the 70's and 80's as well. I also remember the REAL winters when the winter kills impacted the deer numbers for the following year.

2008/09 is shaping up to be one of those "REAL" winters.

[jltimm]

Yeah, and the deer population is already hurting. Hope the winter don't finish the few that we have left off?

[archerystud]

2008/09 is shaping up to be one of those "REAL" winters.

AGREED!

At this point I'm a bit concerned for the deer, but it is early. It's been a cooler Nov and Dec. from what I remember in at least the RECENT past.

[BeezeHound]

Been 10 years since the deer have had to experience anyhting like whats going on right now.

[96trigger]

Yes, last year by the end of winter, the deer were very thin, I might have to start feeding them soon if we keep getting more snow and less melting days. I don't recall last year being terribly harsh until February, this year it is starting much earlier and no end in sight, just more snow.

[lungdeflator]

Does move just as much if not more during the rut then bucks do. So changing the season would just drop the number of overall deer sightings and if you cant see them you cant shoot them so the population would just skyrocket. If people want to see bigger bucks then quit shooting the little ones. MN seems to have a terrible buck to doe ratio so it should be easy to shoot a doe instead of a buck anyways. Shoot the bigger does too. There have been a couple studies suggesting that fawns and 1.5 yr does have a better chance of producing bucks than a 2.5 or older doe.

[picksbigwagon]

Lungderflator, I don't think your studies are correct, the male deer decides the gender of the offspring, so it is the buck that determines the gender of it's offspring....If I am wrong, forgive me, I am only a PE teacher, but if I remember biology correctly, the Male sperm decides the gender of the baby.

[96trigger]

Come on picks, don't you teach health too. Maybe a unit or reproduction?

[picksbigwagon]

No way, I teach Elementary PE, MTV teaches those kids all they need to know about that stuff.......

[B. Amish]

I don't think the buck's sperm has anything to do with determining the gender of the fawm(s). Everything I've read has said that the ratio of fawns is 50:50 if not leaning slightly more towards more buck fawns.

I've read some stuff that says in areas with high deer populations. Does will give birth to more male fawns than females. Kind of natures way to slow down the reproduction and lower the population of deer. Likewise, in areas with low populations, more female fawns may be born.

I've also read stuff that claims that the age of the doe has implications on the sex of the fawn(s).