My response to the brilliant folks at qdma site

[jsasker007]

You are publishing pure fiction about the severe winters—they have been extremely mild. The DNR is the problem in MINNESOTA. Hunters could take up to 5 deer per season for multiple years—that is the problem. Reading more bad information from qdma just confirms my suspicions that you are only interested in the money from people foolish enough to drink your kool-aid - See more at: https://www.qdma.com/top-5-factors-causing-deer-population-declines/#comment-303

This is strictly my opinion but I am really sick of the scam game they play and the excuses they give.

 

[jsasker007]

I doubt they care to hear anything that doesn't agree with what they want people to believe, but they asked for responses so I gave one. They would have review it before they put it up----I don't think they will put it up for others to see? Feel like I'm dealing with politicians over there.

 

[BuckSutherland]

Severe winter was a major problem in my area for 2 years (13 and 14) east of Leech Lake. We had many deer die those years and it was disgusting to see how bad the deer looked. However, like you said the DNR was way over the line with antlerless harvest. 5 deer? Even two deer was too much. Then we have the good old party hunting garbage, wolves, bear. Our DNR has no clue what the hell they are doing, and that's why they got kicked out of the Ripley hunt.

 

[yoderjac]

Interesting article. Thanks for posting the link. I don't think I have a broad enough perspective to know how well those broad generalizations correlate with localities. I like the deer management plan our state has. It is not without controversy. We have a lot of federal lands in the state that can be problematic. The preservationist approach verse a stewardship approach on federal lands does not lend itself to the habitat diversity that support higher populations of deer. It is hard to balance all the stake holders interests. In my locality, our numbers are down but starting to rebound. We probably did a little overcorrection and backed off the doe harvest a bit last year. My guess is we will be able to remove those restrictions this year.

Like politics, so much of deer management is local that it is pretty hard to speak in the broad terms of the article and really say much of value.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[jsasker007]

Lately Minnesota has been a good example of what NOT to do in many areas of conservation. When people could shoot up to 5 deer per season it was still random the way they chose to give out licences. You could take 5 deer but on the other side of the road you could take 2 deer. Do they think deer won't cross a road? Doesn't make any sense to me. My issues are in east central Minnesota and I can't really speak for any other areas. Why they refuse to use antler restrictions to help the young deer mature is also beyond me.

 

[bwoods11]

In Minnesota there is simply too many hunters, and they shoot too many deer. The DNR overestimates the herd every year and has terrible season structure. A 9 day gun season in early November, followed up by a 16 day muzzy season.

Any nice bucks that somehow survive the gun season are then shot during the muzzy season--with a few exceptions. From 2005 until now the number of mature bucks that survive has dropped significantly.

Doe harvest is often too high in some areas, and not enough in others (creating a terrible buck to doe ratio).

In my area, on opening day of gun season, there is a hunter in every piece of cover, often sitting in a box blind, not uncommon to see extremes-- such as 6 hunters on less than 20 acres. It is amazing a mature buck can survive, but a few do make it.

 

[jsasker007]

It seems that maybe Minnesota could learn a lot from the IOWA dnr---things seem much better with the way they structure hunting seasons and numbers of deer. I honestly don't think Minnesota has a good way to figure deer per square mile or they just don't care. We are going down the tubes here in mn. And mn hunters are rifle hunting in the middle of the rut---I don't believe that helps conservation either. jmho.

 

[bwoods11]

Just a follow up, if MN, made changes to season structure or limited tags (doe and buck), I would predict it would be one of the best states to hunt in the Midwest. The habitat/cover is excellent, with some areas having a perfect mix of habitat and crop. I'm not holding my breath that the DNR will do anything though.

 

[bwoods11]

It seems that maybe Minnesota could learn a lot from the IOWA dnr---things seem much better with the way they structure hunting seasons and numbers of deer. I honestly don't think Minnesota has a good way to figure deer per square mile or they just don't care. We are going down the tubes here in mn. And mn hunters are rifle hunting in the middle of the rut---I don't believe that helps conservation either. jmho.

Iowa has the best season structure of any state, not one day of gun season in November.

 

[jsasker007]

I too have lost faith with anything our dnr is involved in. Minnesota in the land of unrealized potential. Having a governor who doesn't know where he's at half the time doesn't help anything either. jmho

 

[4wanderingeyes]

I would like to see MN go back to the 2 gun seasons, the 2 day first weekend, and the 4 day second weekend. Muzzie season should be about a 9 day hunt in early December, and bow should be shorter as well, maybe October through December.

Also limit 1 license per purchased hunt, for instance, 1 tag gun, 1 for bow, 1 for muzzle loader, if you want all 3, you need to purchase all 3.

I dont like to force people to shoot, or not shoot deer because of the antler size. Not every hunter cares how big their head gear is, myself included. I am interested in a decent amount of meat from my hunt, so I look for an adult deer, it doesnt need to have big antlers, or any as far as I am concerned. Not everyone is a trophy hunter, nor should they be. Where I use to hunt, some years I could go 5 years without seeing a buck, and when they werent handing out doe tags, you get pretty excited to actually see a deer with anything on its head.

I quit gun hunting in MN about 10 years ago, although I do still bow hunt in MN. I know in northern MN, they did have 2 hard winters in a row, in I believe 13-14, then to top that off, there were record amounts of wolves, and bears, that spells disaster for deer, and most wildlife. What MN needs most is to keep the lobbyists away from the DNR, and the lawmakers. The insurance industry shouldnt be able to lube some hands and be able to alter quotas.

 

[jsasker007]

I really like venison. If I could get it from the store I wouldn't be nearly as bothered. I have not gotten a deer in a couple years.

 

[bwoods11]

I would like to see MN go back to the 2 gun seasons, the 2 day first weekend, and the 4 day second weekend. Muzzie season should be about a 9 day hunt in early December, and bow should be shorter as well, maybe October through December.

Also limit 1 license per purchased hunt, for instance, 1 tag gun, 1 for bow, 1 for muzzle loader, if you want all 3, you need to purchase all 3.

I dont like to force people to shoot, or not shoot deer because of the antler size. Not every hunter cares how big their head gear is, myself included. I am interested in a decent amount of meat from my hunt, so I look for an adult deer, it doesnt need to have big antlers, or any as far as I am concerned. Not everyone is a trophy hunter, nor should they be. Where I use to hunt, some years I could go 5 years without seeing a buck, and when they werent handing out doe tags, you get pretty excited to actually see a deer with anything on its head.

I quit gun hunting in MN about 10 years ago, although I do still bow hunt in MN. I know in northern MN, they did have 2 hard winters in a row, in I believe 13-14, then to top that off, there were record amounts of wolves, and bears, that spells disaster for deer, and most wildlife. What MN needs most is to keep the lobbyists away from the DNR, and the lawmakers. The insurance industry shouldnt be able to lube some hands and be able to alter quotas.

Good ideas on the gun season, I would add, no matter what, one buck. No crosstag...and possibly even buck tags in some zones. I know there is 5x as many hunters in some zones as actual bucks alive.

Some areas of MN, should probably not even have any doe tags, south of me in the open farm zone, the deer population has not recovered enough.

 

[tooln]

I always though it was dumb to have the MN rifle season so close to the rut.

 

[yoderjac]

The department here in VA has done a pretty good job. They set goals on a per county basis to increase, stabilize, or decrease populations. Our seasons are very long. Everyone is limited to 3 antlered bucks per year but does are unlimited on private land (you do pay for each bonus tag for does). I guess they figure private land hunters are more self-regulating and public land hunters are more competitive when it comes to harvest. On private land the general thought is, "if I don't shot him, he'll be even bigger next year" and on public land it is "If I don't shot him someone else will.". In my view, the issue with national forest is the management, not the regulations. If the resource is controlled by folks with a protectionist mentality, it won't support higher numbers regardless of regulations.

I think antler restrictions are a political decision within the hunting community. If you have antler restrictions, especially in areas where doe harvest is restricted to increase population, it is very difficult to recruit new hunters into the community with low chance of any harvest. I love antler restrictions self-imposed on private land. We target bucks that are 3 1/2 years or older. The state is experimenting with antler restrictions in a few areas but have not imposed them in mass.

Each state, and even counties within a state, have their own issues to contend with. Our department does a good job in general. That is not to say I like all the regs. I don't like regs allowing hunting deer with hounds or allowing dog hunters retrieval rights on the posted private property of others, but evidently that is a tradition in this state. Gotta take the bad with the good.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[jsasker007]

I think the first 2 or 3 years would be the most difficult with antler restrictions---but would be better for the deer and the hunters and they let some small deer mature. We won't ever have a decent balance of different age classes of deer if we keep killing them when they are small.jmho.

 

[bueller]

I think the first 2 or 3 years would be the most difficult with antler restrictions---but would be better for the deer and the hunters and they let some small deer mature. We won't ever have a decent balance of different age classes of deer if we keep killing them when they are small.jmho.

CWD. They don't want older deer wandering around the state. Neither does WI and I'm sure many other states.

 

[yoderjac]

CWD. They don't want older deer wandering around the state. Neither does WI and I'm sure many other states.

The CWD threat makes sense. As for antler restrictions, I'm torn. While I selfishly want to see a better age class balance and implement them myself, I also see our sport dying through attrition as fewer kids are entering the sport. Without some way to encourage them the trend could accelerate.

We try to strike a balance on our property. For experienced hunters, we target 3 1/2 and older bucks, but we let new hunters take any buck. After they have a few deer under their belts and develop a love for the sport, we remove the exemption to the rule for them.

Another thing that bothers me about antler restrictions is the greyness of the line. I'm surprised how easy it is to make mistakes. An extreme example is one of my archery hunts years ago, I was archery hunting on a military base. I was video taping my own hunt. It was the middle of the afternoon on a beautiful day in the fall. To make a long story short, I saw a doe coming in from a long distance casually feeding on acorns. I eventually shot her at 20 yards. She ran out of sight but I herd her go down and her death bawl. I knew where she was, so I walked right to her and found her. When I looked it was a young buck with 8" spikes. I really thought I found someone else's deer. I had to back-trail the blood trail to convince myself it was the deer I shot. It was. Later I reviewed the video. There were only 1 or two places in the video where the sun filtered through the mature oak trees just right that you could see an antler. Fortunately I had a buck tag left so it was no problem for me, but it showed me something.

Do I really want a youngster, just developing a sense of ethics, to walk up on a deer he shot and have to deal with whether he should self-report a mistake? If I can make a mistake at 20 yards archery hunting under the best conditions between a buck and doe, how easy is it for a novice to make a mistake under more difficult conditions at longer range when a clear view at a rack might not be possible?

I remain torn on antler restrictions. I love the idea of letting young bucks walk in general and I think it is probably the most effective leg of QDM one can implement yet I'm not sure I want to see it codified into regulations.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Four Seasons]

The CWD thing makes...No Sense! How many years does it take some to see like the same top 5 states in both record books all being CWD positive states before they get it that CWD is killing nothing? It takes mature deer to grow antlers to make books.
CWD is just another political excuse used by states. Always has and always will. The same states that have had CWD for years are still the same over populated states that they have always been. How can this be?

 

[bueller]

The CWD thing makes...No Sense! How many years does it take some to see like the same top 5 states in both record books all being CWD positive states before they get it that CWD is killing nothing? It takes mature deer to grow antlers to make books.
CWD is just another political excuse used by states. Always has and always will. The same states that have had CWD for years are still the same over populated states that they have always been. How can this be?

I never said it makes sense. But when the cwd rate for adult bucks is approaching 50% while the cwd rate of yearling bucks is around 10%, good luck getting apr's approved.