This, this, this. As long as the title of the thread is relevant and the responses are on topic. Too many threads that don't interest you? find a new site or make your own.
All Things Habitat - Lets talk.....
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
This, this, this. As long as the title of the thread is relevant and the responses are on topic. Too many threads that don't interest you? find a new site or make your own.
buckvelvet
5 year old buck +
I don't like Steve but his reply is spot on. Check that I don't know steve nor have I talked to him so maybe i do like him? Or possibly Steve smells bad, this is how I feel about all this, i can just laugh it off.
I feel bad for you MN guys and I followed you over here cuz ya'll are a fun pack of crazy's. Perhaps there some misremembering of sorts, maybe we can question Roger Clemens on that.
Lets all hug this out, no reach arounds.
B
BJE80
Guest
There are a lot of very knowledgeable and elite habitat guys on here. For which I am very thankful. Along with the high knowledge naturally also comes big egos. Combine those big egos with a great passion for an important hot button topic that directly affects the quality of many people’s hunts well yeah I can see why there is friction.
West Branch
5 year old buck +
Steve Bartylla
5 year old buck +
Now I'm just madder than I've ever been. You guys know I've always been self conscious about my uncontrollably obnoxious body odor issues and the countless hours of therapy it's taken to come to grips with it. That was a low blow...And I suspect it was due to me flipping the V & B in my reference to your post on this. That was an accident. This is just purposefully mean and hurtful. If anyone needs me, I'll be crying in my room until at least Monday, perhaps longer.
sandbur
5 year old buck +
Steve, don't worry as it is only temporary.
The ice is going out and you can soon take a bath.
My Dad used to say that spring came, he took a bath and found a pair of long underwear that he thought he had loss. He hadn't seen them all winter.
buckvelvet
5 year old buck +
HAHA, that's funny right there.
bueller
Moderator
Spent the day breaking ground on a new plot and spreading lime. Then went out for a fish fry. Just settled down on the couch and decided to check out the forum. Very sorry I did. Enough of this crap already. Wipe your tears with all the teenage girls on facebook. Myself, I'm logging off for the night.
Last edited:
B
bat man
Guest
More than a little disappointed that some here choose to not only dismiss an issue very important to many on this site, but to take it a step further and belittle those passionate about the issue?
foggy
5 year old buck +
Yeah....^what he said. .....And I wudd'nt piss Bat Man off......he ain't pretty when he's mad. ;)
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
Not trying to offend anyone here, but maybe focus on what WE, as hunters, are doing to improve things in our respective areas. In my local hunting area of about 5 sq. miles, we don't even mention the Pa. Game Commission any more. All the local camps are doing the same things to improve our herd - planting food plots, apple, crab and pear trees, spruce and pine for screening / bedding / thermal protection. And laying off the trigger, not killing just to fill a tag.
Instead of picking open the same wounds, getting angry over things that are done & over with, make those agencies more or less irrelevant in your local hunting areas. Organize among yourselves and make your own areas better. We did that here ( my hunting area ). It takes some communication and work - but that's what we're doing HERE already !! Our local camps don't b**** about the PGC now ........ we do our improvements IN SPITE OF THEM. We've been back & forth over the winter by e-mail and phone to discuss what we're all planting this spring, coyote sign, winter-killed deer ( if any ), timbering, etc. I got detailed lists of apples and crabs and food plots from a couple neighboring camps and shared what we're planting. Positive momentum is contagious. And it feels better than anger & frustration.
Organization and communication gets results.
Instead of picking open the same wounds, getting angry over things that are done & over with, make those agencies more or less irrelevant in your local hunting areas. Organize among yourselves and make your own areas better. We did that here ( my hunting area ). It takes some communication and work - but that's what we're doing HERE already !! Our local camps don't b**** about the PGC now ........ we do our improvements IN SPITE OF THEM. We've been back & forth over the winter by e-mail and phone to discuss what we're all planting this spring, coyote sign, winter-killed deer ( if any ), timbering, etc. I got detailed lists of apples and crabs and food plots from a couple neighboring camps and shared what we're planting. Positive momentum is contagious. And it feels better than anger & frustration.
Organization and communication gets results.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
How much public land borders or is in the area your talking about? Many of the guys in MN border public land and have far, far less control over the "neighbors" than folks who live in primarily privately owned areas. In those instances, only a change at the state/DNR level is going to help them recover their deer herd. No amount of habitat improvements or neighborly lovefests will help them if they don't get a lower kill on the public grounds around them. No matter how good the habitat, deer will wander and will likely end up in dangerous territory at some point and when the open tags are there to be used, those deer will be shot. Just sayin'.
B
bat man
Guest
Over and done with? Who decided things are over and done with? You can not make the agency irrelevant and to assert so is not an educated statement.
I own 827 acres that is bordered by 2,000 to the west and 6,000 to the south all currently managed at a quasi trophy level. When you tell the public there are too many deer and sell them 5 tags and blame low harvest on wind rain corn and do it over again next year even the largest parcels feel the burn over time.
We have areas with incredible potential holding 7 dpsm currently. Drive across an invisible county line and you can find 3 times that many deer. By design. Because of the influence of different area managers. Do you suggest ignoring that?
Responsible state management is the single best tool available. The impact my DNR has on the local herd will always cap any effort I put forth.
My hunting quality is well above the norm, but to stick my head in the sand and ignore what is going on around me will limit what I can do on my piece, and I will not pretend it does not.
foggy
5 year old buck +
^ This is precisely what we are doing here mister. Don't you think that most of us from MN are also doing what you are doing to manage our properties? I assure you we are, and likely more! We also need some decent regulations by our DNR and the way we do that is by organization and communication.....just like you said above. I choose to take exception to the way our DNR is operating.....and won't back away from conversations in that area. Don't read my words if they offend you.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Hmmm, let's see? In WI our sportsmen beat our DNR into submission on a regular basis and we finally got something done here after a whole bunch of years with unlimited tags and extra seasons. Is it perfect, absolutely not, but it is far better than what we had. We got our unit boundaries changed to where management is now done on a scale that is more personal and easier to understand by using the county lines as boundaries instead of random roads and rivers separating the units. County residents can now take "ownership" of the management of their deer herd. We also have habitat zones within some of those counties that can be managed differently within the county based on if it is primarily an ag area or a forest area, because we all know they need to be dealt with differently. We also have separate tags which can only be used on public or private lands, not both, like it was before, because again we all know that public ground needs to be managed differently than private acres to keep the overkill on the public ground from getting out of hand. We are now using recommendations by county citizen boards to adjust our herd quota numbers on a county by county basis using all the great data the the DNR collects to make those decisions. I really think our DNR has embraced this process and are more willing than ever to work with WI hunters because they realize that they don't have the time and money to manage deer on a micro scale without the input of the hunters, which is needed now more than ever due to the whole "deer pocket" phenomenon which occurs almost everywhere now and will continue to increase as more habitat gets used for other things. The WI DNR didn't have this epiphany on their own, on the contrary, they thought they were doing a adequate job, the huge drop in satisfied hunters and lost license sales told another story. The hunters of WI complained and our leadership responded to find a better way. With being "Minnesota Nice" and all, it isn't the MN hunters fault that the citizens need a bigger, more sustained "push" to get them to ask for change and open dialog is what will generate those changes.
Now it could(maybe) be argued that by having the MDDI thread and a few others already addressing the issues, that one doesn't need to start other threads to cover the subject? Ok, so we have multiple threads started on every conceivable question there could possibly be on apple trees, but there seems to be 15 new threads a week on apples, so how could we limit threads on one subject without limiting all others? I could sit here and b!tch that I don't grow apples, I have never had success with growing them, and I don't care to hear about them anymore, but I don't. I read them and even participate if I have feedback or questions, otherwise I read them and move on or don't click on them at all. Same thing with trail cameras, don't own or operate any, so those threads don't interest me, the only reason I click on them at all is that I like to see everyone's photos, I seldom reply to one, and that's ok by me. Others may want to try a few of these alternate options as well.
Now it could(maybe) be argued that by having the MDDI thread and a few others already addressing the issues, that one doesn't need to start other threads to cover the subject? Ok, so we have multiple threads started on every conceivable question there could possibly be on apple trees, but there seems to be 15 new threads a week on apples, so how could we limit threads on one subject without limiting all others? I could sit here and b!tch that I don't grow apples, I have never had success with growing them, and I don't care to hear about them anymore, but I don't. I read them and even participate if I have feedback or questions, otherwise I read them and move on or don't click on them at all. Same thing with trail cameras, don't own or operate any, so those threads don't interest me, the only reason I click on them at all is that I like to see everyone's photos, I seldom reply to one, and that's ok by me. Others may want to try a few of these alternate options as well.
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
I'm not offended by what you Minn. guys are saying. I've worked big construction for over 34 yrs. so you can't say something I haven't heard. It isn't ME you need to worry about !! Whip said most of you landowners border some state land. I didn't know you had so many scattered patches of state land. I thought that the areas with a lot of ag were all in the hands of private folks where you could work together to improve your hunting. My hunting area is all in private hands, so working together isn't impossible. Here and in other states I've hunted in, state land is more commonly in big tracts in non-ag areas. If Minn. has lots of scattered tracts, that would make it tougher to accomplish the cooperation I was speaking of.
I also didn't think you guys were doing nothing to improve your properties. I read all that you guys write about your plantings, cutting & hinging, etc. And I know how fired-up you gents are about your situation - I would be too. I was only suggesting moving FORWARD, and not letting the past crap weigh you down to where the anger becomes a hindrance, or ammo for the other side to use against you guys. I'd like to see things change for the better in SEVERAL states, including mine. Part of the problem lies in the fact that in ANY state, the biggest % of the population doesn't hunt, so they don't give a rat's *** about our concerns anyway. All the more reason to keep the making of hunters' points civil to try to sway public sentiment toward us & not away from us. I don't think finger-pointing or name-calling benefits the cause ..... anywhere. Public pressure and political pressure may be the only avenues for you there.
I've always read these " deer numbers down " threads because I've seen it here, and I'm interested in other states' problems. Also solutions. That's why I wrote what I did in post #38. If my suggestions don't work there as they have here ...... well then they don't. BELIEVE ME - I hope you gents get things turned around in Minn., Wisc., Mich., or any other state enduring this crappy situation. Every conservation effort in history has been an uphill battle, and this one's no different.
I also didn't think you guys were doing nothing to improve your properties. I read all that you guys write about your plantings, cutting & hinging, etc. And I know how fired-up you gents are about your situation - I would be too. I was only suggesting moving FORWARD, and not letting the past crap weigh you down to where the anger becomes a hindrance, or ammo for the other side to use against you guys. I'd like to see things change for the better in SEVERAL states, including mine. Part of the problem lies in the fact that in ANY state, the biggest % of the population doesn't hunt, so they don't give a rat's *** about our concerns anyway. All the more reason to keep the making of hunters' points civil to try to sway public sentiment toward us & not away from us. I don't think finger-pointing or name-calling benefits the cause ..... anywhere. Public pressure and political pressure may be the only avenues for you there.
I've always read these " deer numbers down " threads because I've seen it here, and I'm interested in other states' problems. Also solutions. That's why I wrote what I did in post #38. If my suggestions don't work there as they have here ...... well then they don't. BELIEVE ME - I hope you gents get things turned around in Minn., Wisc., Mich., or any other state enduring this crappy situation. Every conservation effort in history has been an uphill battle, and this one's no different.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
I understand what you are getting at bnb, and MN may not have the scattered tracts of public that we have here in WI, so that my be a bit overstated for them. But I know a few guys in MN who deal with the public land border issues for sure, and I truly feel for them, having been raised on land that bordered public and hunted public lands my whole life as well. I know first hand how those things play out over the long term. It is not pretty. The thing is, why should any of us have to RELY on forming coops(not that they are a bad thing at all either way and would be of benefit no matter what) when we pay the salaries of the state agency that is in place to protect and nurture our use of the states resources. They should be working for us and helping the end users to better enjoy the resources they are in charge of. Yet without constant prodding and calling out of those that are in charge, they sit on their hands and do nothing, that shouldn't have to be the way it is. Changes need to be made, I am skeptically confident that WI is finally turning a corner(if the Gov and Leg don't *#@% it up) and it was through hard work and pushing that it was accomplished.
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
Can't disagree with you on the taxpayer - paid state agency point Whip. My thought is how fast the gov. agencies like DNR or the PGC get their act in gear - our local camps decided not to wait on them. We kind-of made some preemptive moves on our own. But your point is well taken on whose responsibility it is to steward the resources for the future in ANY state. We are individually, to a lesser extent, but the state agencies are to the larger extent. That's where the $$$ and political influence throw a wrench into the works.
I'm glad to hear that in WI things may be getting better. I hope it continues. I only wish the tide turns in all the other affected states that have made the deer public enemy #1.
I too hunted state land for the first 20 years of my hunting life, before I joined my camp. I still hunt state land periodically. One thing I've noticed here is the number of hunters using state land is much lower than it used to be. In my area of the state, the deer numbers got low enough on public land, I think hunters figured " what's the point in hunting here? " I don't think bordering state land around my area of Pa. is a terrible thing now, just because the lack of deer has cut the number of hunters way down. You gents in the Upper Midwest may see that happen too.
Nothing on these threads offends me when striving for better deer hunting. All of us on here are pretty much preaching to the choir on that topic !! I'm waiting for the thread that has a title " We're winning the fight for better deer numbers ". Best of luck in the struggle.
I'm glad to hear that in WI things may be getting better. I hope it continues. I only wish the tide turns in all the other affected states that have made the deer public enemy #1.
I too hunted state land for the first 20 years of my hunting life, before I joined my camp. I still hunt state land periodically. One thing I've noticed here is the number of hunters using state land is much lower than it used to be. In my area of the state, the deer numbers got low enough on public land, I think hunters figured " what's the point in hunting here? " I don't think bordering state land around my area of Pa. is a terrible thing now, just because the lack of deer has cut the number of hunters way down. You gents in the Upper Midwest may see that happen too.
Nothing on these threads offends me when striving for better deer hunting. All of us on here are pretty much preaching to the choir on that topic !! I'm waiting for the thread that has a title " We're winning the fight for better deer numbers ". Best of luck in the struggle.
sandbur
5 year old buck +
This week, I received an email from a national deer organization on low deer numbers and too many does being killed.. I skimmed over it and it basically said that you should form coops and make good decisions on doe kill on your private properties. This is very true. It does upset me that a national deer hunting organization can not work for the hunter that owns a small piece of property where he can not control things, or where he is near public land where too many does are killed. The simple truth is that many of us cannot afford the bigger pieces of property to control a deer herd.
Still very evident that the organization does not understand the problem. You need to live here or hunt here for more than a few days to comprehend the problem.
There is also the matter of Camp Ripley which had been one of the premier bow hunting locations in our state. It has deteriorated to where hunters average seeing one deer per day and many hunters no longer apply for the limited entry hunt. It is all public land, but limited entry and it's management is a total disaster. Coops and private land management will do nothing for Camp Ripley hunts.
It is now time for action. Contact your Mn. legislator and ask them to vote for an audit of the deer management program.
Still very evident that the organization does not understand the problem. You need to live here or hunt here for more than a few days to comprehend the problem.
There is also the matter of Camp Ripley which had been one of the premier bow hunting locations in our state. It has deteriorated to where hunters average seeing one deer per day and many hunters no longer apply for the limited entry hunt. It is all public land, but limited entry and it's management is a total disaster. Coops and private land management will do nothing for Camp Ripley hunts.
It is now time for action. Contact your Mn. legislator and ask them to vote for an audit of the deer management program.
j-bird
Moderator
I have avoided this thread thus far because I thought the thread being posted right after John locked the other one down was being antagonistic. That - I wasn't going to support (out of respect for John). My post of the thread that got locked and my only comment here will be this: In my opinion - there is NO national organization that is going to openly call out the various state wildlife management agencies in areas where significant deer population declines have been seen and aggressive antlerless harvests are still being promoted. In my opinion the ONLY people that are going to fight your respective state agency is the citizens of that state (hunters or otherwise). It again is my opinion that some of the national organizations are being turned to by hunters as some of these hunters feel these organizations will help get changes made at the state level. It is my opinion - that those hunters are going to be grossly disappointed. These hunters may still find very valuable information - but potentially not the information and support they are after. I am a member of some of these national organizations. I have tried to follow what has happened in MN and use them as an example of what may lie in store for my own state. I see MDDI as an example of organized action for if/when people need to take matters into their own hands.
Taking matters into your own hands - again, in my opinion - is the only way to influence change. To me that means managing your own property to it's fullest, BUT that also means being active in influencing the process within my own state wildlife agency.
To John - I mean no disrespect to your wishes. I simply feel I should voice MY OPINION on the matter and as such refrained from mentioning ANY organization specifically, or using any negative references to these organization.
Taking matters into your own hands - again, in my opinion - is the only way to influence change. To me that means managing your own property to it's fullest, BUT that also means being active in influencing the process within my own state wildlife agency.
To John - I mean no disrespect to your wishes. I simply feel I should voice MY OPINION on the matter and as such refrained from mentioning ANY organization specifically, or using any negative references to these organization.
Similar threads
