Iowa DNR Biologist Conversation

[bwoods11]

My opinion: If MN would have 1 gun season (starting after WI closes) and all other states would leave their season/regulations the same as the are currently, within 3 years MN would be the best mature Buck hunting in the country.

I think it could happen as aging DNR staff retires and younger people start making decisions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree… with an emphasis on 1 buck . No party hunting/cross tagging ! Minnesota would be exceptional !

I have 2 bucks on my farm that are 3 yr old that probably score close to 150! This buck was shot 2 miles from my farm (this year) it scored mid 160 (3 yr old) …

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely asking. How do yall know he was 3?

 

[bwoods11]

Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely asking. How do yall know he was 3?

The kid that shot him, his dad is a big time property manager. They had a 1.5 yr old, 2.5 yr old pic(s) of him.

 

[cbw]

Are bucks really that scarce that people fear only seeing one buck of any kind in a four or eight day season?

Not that bucks are scarce, more that in gun season, it’s mostly party hunt and brown is down. Fill the freezer mentality. Tradition.

It was the way I grew up learning the sport. Until I started archery hunting.

Though the party hunting is getting less and less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[356]

Yea, they've got it right. Wish MO would follow.

I think Missouri generally has it right....especially given CWD. Sure, hunters are happier if this topic is simply not brought up, but CWD is a reality that must be understood. Our hunting practices and priorities will have to adapt to protect our sport for the next generation (and the next decade). My fear is that Iowa may lag behind the curve of best practices.

 

[356]

Missouri asks hunters most years about season timings. Survey respondents overwhelmingly favor an early firearm season during the rut (although it is changing). People who visit habitat or hunting forums are a small portion of the total number of people who are deer hunters. Right now the average hunter is probably less informed about what other states are doing. As a conservation service do you just change the dates against the preference of most and risk lower participation in the hunting seasons and by extension get less revenue for your own program? Minnesota has the same issue. Pennsylvania did a similar effort a few years ago when doing APRs. People came around and I think most would agree the hunting has been better since before they started the initiative (despite some of the known issues with antler point restrictions). People are naturally incredibly resistant to change.

I wonder if Iowa wasn't somewhat lucky and now likes to act like they proactively made the positive changes that make the state so great for whitetail hunting. They have done a pretty good job about resisting more recent negative changes to their hunting regulations. And certainly they are a great model to follow.

I think state conservation agencies should get out in front and promote what other states have done to have positive impacts on hunting quality. They could use states like Indiana as an example.

Missouri's survey is currently open. Personally, I am advocating for a late August two-day velvet hunt with APRs, along with a few other changes that promote hunter harvest in CWD counties. I am torn on advocating for Earn-A-Buck, but generally see it as a tool in some areas of the state. I also advocate for banning minerals and baiting statewide. Currently, in non-CWD zones the use of minerals and bait — which includes grain or other feed placed or scattered so as to attract deer or turkeys while hunting is illegal. An area is considered baited for 10 days after complete removal of the bait.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Missouri's survey is currently open. Personally, I am advocating for a late August two-day velvet hunt with APRs, along with a few other changes that promote hunter harvest in CWD counties. I am torn on advocating for Earn-A-Buck, but generally see it as a tool in some areas of the state. I also advocate for banning minerals and baiting statewide. Currently, in non-CWD zones the use of minerals and bait — which includes grain or other feed placed or scattered so as to attract deer or turkeys while hunting is illegal. An area is considered baited for 10 days after complete removal of the bait.

I’m curious has hunter harvest been shown to decrease prevalence of cwd? If it has why not just make it open year round? Why have apr’s if the goal is to kill?
I think a velvet season would be another cut in a bleeding buck age class. Personally if I had a voice, I’d rather take my chances with cwd than opening up more excuses to kill bucks.

 

[OakSeeds]

I agree… with an emphasis on 1 buck . No party hunting/cross tagging ! Minnesota would be exceptional !

I have 2 bucks on my farm that are 3 yr old that probably score close to 150!View attachment 82897 This buck was shot 2 miles from my farm (this year) it scored mid 160 (3 yr old) …

very nice deer ... and 5 crab claws helps and is s a bit unusual ... best I ever got was 4

 

[356]

I’m curious has hunter harvest been shown to decrease prevalence of cwd? If it has why not just make it open year round? Why have apr’s if the goal is to kill?
I think a velvet season would be another cut in a bleeding buck age class. Personally if I had a voice, I’d rather take my chances with cwd than opening up more excuses to kill bucks.

In areas with targeted removal the prevalence rate is stabilizing. Like it or not, it is working.
The CWD portion successfully focused harvest pressure on specific CWD Management Zone counties. For example, during the 2024 season, the highest county harvest totals for the CWD portion were Franklin (413), Jefferson (301), and Howell (279)--CWD hotspots.

The CWD portion increased harvests by 11,707 in 2023 11,424 in 2024.

During the post-season targeted removal 4,768 deer were taken through a combination of landowners and sharpshooters. 70 of those tested positive, a significant number considering of the 36,000 deer tested during the regular season, only 173 tested positive. 36% of all CWD positive deer were those taken through targeted removal.

Missouri's statewide prevalence rate is under 0.5%. In the targeted removal areas the prevalence rate was 1.8%.

Key factors that are fueling the flames: 1) The idea that Oklahoma and captive breeders have "immune deer." Nope, with the G96S gene they just live a little longer and spread the disease for about six to eight months more. Also, the G96S gene they are breeding for is already mutating, so the "longevity" of selective breeding may not be long term. 2) The best way to buy time for better solutions/cure is to increase harvest of all age class deer to just below carrying capacity. This flies in the face of 35 years of QDM of "let 'em go they they can grow."

 

[Hoytvectrix]

In areas with targeted removal the prevalence rate is stabilizing. Like it or not, it is working.
The CWD portion successfully focused harvest pressure on specific CWD Management Zone counties. For example, during the 2024 season, the highest county harvest totals for the CWD portion were Franklin (413), Jefferson (301), and Howell (279)--CWD hotspots.

The CWD portion increased harvests by 11,707 in 2023 11,424 in 2024.

During the post-season targeted removal 4,768 deer were taken through a combination of landowners and sharpshooters. 70 of those tested positive, a significant number considering of the 36,000 deer tested during the regular season, only 173 tested positive. 36% of all CWD positive deer were those taken through targeted removal.

Missouri's statewide prevalence rate is under 0.5%. In the targeted removal areas the prevalence rate was 1.8%.

Key factors that are fueling the flames: 1) The idea that Oklahoma and captive breeders have "immune deer." Nope, with the G96S gene they just live a little longer and spread the disease for about six to eight months more. Also, the G96S gene they are breeding for is already mutating, so the "longevity" of selective breeding may not be long term. 2) The best way to buy time for better solutions/cure is to increase harvest of all age class deer to just below carrying capacity. This flies in the face of 35 years of QDM of "let 'em go they they can grow."

Thanks for the informative response.

I want to trust the experts studying these things. I feel like people are rooting for one outcome or another and choosing what they want to believe when researchers are finally starting to better understand the impacts of past management strategies on larger scales. Hearing accounts from property owners that have had it for a few years now is incredibly demoralizing.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

so I guess it goes to my other question, why have an early velvet season with apr? Why not just have an open season on anything?

 

[356]

so I guess it goes to my other question, why have an early velvet season with apr? Why not just have an open season on anything?

Incentive. It is my understanding that making something unique, and somewhat rare, will drive more hunters into the field than just opening the weekend to hunting. It’s a delicate balance. I know the MDC is watching numbers in Kentucky and Arkansas to see if such a season will produce appropriate results. Another factor is that there are still many does with spotted fawns, so the timing of the season would generally be an antlered deer only.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Incentive. It is my understanding that making something unique, and somewhat rare, will drive more hunters into the field than just opening the weekend to hunting. It’s a delicate balance. I know the MDC is watching numbers in Kentucky and Arkansas to see if such a season will produce appropriate results. Another factor is that there are still many does with spotted fawns, so the timing of the season would generally be an antlered deer only.

I guess I just don’t understand the game. Are we just dancing around what one theory says needs to be done? Who cares if we kill a fawns that are still nursing isn’t the name of the game eradication?
I’m not discounting cwd, I’m just confused on what the actual plan should be.

 

[SwampCat]

AR has a so call early season or “velvet season”. Mature bucks are known to carry a higher prevalence of cwd and they also tend to move around a lot. A “velvet season”, with APR - gives hunters the feeling they are hunting something special - when really they are hunting the bigger bucks with higher cwd prevalence rates -‘playing right into G&F’s hands

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Uncle Ted ain’t concerned

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=759580116768947

 

[Brian662]

Uncle Ted, the foremost export on all things outdoors

 

[Double Creek]

I’ve listened to a couple podcasts recently regarding the NW Arkansas CDW studies and it’s pretty disturbing. If I remember correctly, over 50% of 3 yr old and older bucks were CWD positive. It’s shocking that any state allows baiting and mineral sites given the implications. I personally find it very disturbing.

 

[SwampCat]

I’ve listened to a couple podcasts recently regarding the NW Arkansas CDW studies and it’s pretty disturbing. If I remember correctly, over 50% of 3 yr old and older bucks were CWD positive. It’s shocking that any state allows baiting and mineral sites given the implications. I personally find it very disturbing.

When it all comes out, this study is going to be very interesting - and yes - maybe very disturbing. The G&F thought process - keep allowing baiting during season to aid in hunter success, to help reduce deer density. As far as the mineral sites. Cattle ranchers on both sides of me freely use mineral blocks for their cattle - and both will admit that large numbers of deer use those mineral sites. I dont really know how you stop the minerals without affecting the cattle farms.

 

[356]

I guess I just don’t understand the game. Are we just dancing around what one theory says needs to be done? Who cares if we kill a fawns that are still nursing isn’t the name of the game eradication?
I’m not discounting cwd, I’m just confused on what the actual plan should be.

You make a valid point about "the game,"as management involves human nature. While the best way to manage populations at or above carrying capacity is to reduce deer populatons of all ages, including fawns, that is not popular with most hunters. The average hunter will not shoot a fawn. It would be safe to say that even on this habitat focused forum, there are many who will not shoot a fawn for a variety of reasons--from personal feelings to burning a tag for little meat.

Today, I am not adverse shot taking a fawn (and have done so intentionally several times). This is because a deer biologist friend helped me understand the math behind population balance. Before that, I would not have taken a fawn. So in that regard, cultural norms and expectations can get in the way of good management.

For several years, Missouri did not test fawns for CWD under the assumption they would not have the disease. That was not correct, and it is possible for mothers to transmit the disease to their offspring. Given what we know about CWD, increasing balanced age structure harvest should be one of the goals. This will also ensure the deer on the landscape are enjoying habitat that is under carrying capacity, allowing bucks to reach their full body size and antler size, and does producing healthy fawns that produce larger, healthier deer.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

This probably is answer-able I just haven’t asked the right person. But what was the catalyst in nw ark that prompted testing? Dead deer, sick deer, random?

I just saw they found some positives in southeast Georgia recently. Why did they test there? Hunters just curious? State randomly testing?

When ehd runs through and area, the hunting world knows. When cwd runs through and area, it seems like we only know cause biologist tell us. I can’t help feeling like the covid thing. All the smarties told us it’s ravaging cities and communities, bodies stacked up head high…not one single person I know saw any of that, including a buddy who is an er doc.

I enjoyed chamberlain on meateater and got some good info but I’m still not convinced that we haven’t had this disease a lot longer and lot more widespread than we realize. Does that mean it won’t decimate deer herds, maybe, or maybe it’s yet to do its work…just seems odd it’s taken this long if it’s been around since the 60’s.