Ben, I think high grading is the last thing hunters in MN have to worry about for quite a while. I don't believe that one can notice the effects in one, two, four or even eight years. It's not like all the very top enders are gone in the blink of an eye and their genes lost forever. I believe that high grading is a very gradual, long term issue, and one you likely won't even begin to notice in SE MN for another 10 or so years. the catch is that it also likely takes at least as long to recover and would take buy in from a lot of hunters to reverse the situation (pass the bucks with better headgear and target those with lesser headgear for as many ears as the reverse happened by default). To me, it's just not sound deer management and bucks Mother Nature's system.
My experiences in SE MN are way different than what you describe. I finished working in the area the year before APRs came into play. I had more 4.5s that grossed over 150 than were in the 120-130 range. By the time I left, those 120-130" 4.5s had been hunted hard for 6-7 years, starting when they hit 3.5. You could really see the difference. I'm not saying that all the 120-130" 4.5 genes were removed or anything like that, but their influence were somewhat minimized, while the genes of the better bucks were accentuated, if that makes any sense. At the same time, the standing stock manipulation had more of an impact, with the bucks showing better antler characteristics given a free pass and holes to fill to get them to 4.5+. In other words, a 140-180" 4.5 was the expectation, while those low enders were made a priority from 3.5 on. What we had there wasn't "natural." We did most everything reasonable to shape it into what we wanted, and it worked.
Art,
The reason I'd go for pushing firearms out of the rut has 0 to do with antler porn and 100% to do with building the herd. I'm going to say something that risks offending people and will make me look like a mega spoiled a$$hat. Read this thread, particularly the last handful of pages. What is one of the themes? In a nutshell, it's "our situation sucks (which it certainly does) and needs to be changed, but MN hunters don't want to do what needs to be done to change it." Now, I tend to agree with most here in believing that none of the options in the OP will happen any time soon, if ever. Still, if you guys really want to change your situation, some things have to happen that MN hunters, including many here on this forum, won't like. You're really facing with 2 choices on a state wide basis: hope that reducing doe tags lasts and that it makes a significant difference or make a change that stings. How many hunters really shot 5 does? I'm sure you can come up with a handful, but far from the majority. In fact, I'd be shocked if MN hunters averaged shooting 1 doe per deer hunting license sold.
When firearms season is smack dab in the chase phase, all deer are going to be a lot easier to kill, including does. Those does are running wild, leading bucks on merry chases all over the place. When hunters are sitting with a rifle in their hands, she becomes much easier pickings. MN firearms has the worst of both worlds, as it also covers breeding season. Mrs Hot Pants drastically increases her movements the 24 hrs before entering estrus, again making it far easier to kill her with a firearms. Having firearms season during the rut is a herd crusher. Will that ever change in MN? probably not, but if things don't change I fear that 10 years from now, we'll still be sitting here with our arthritic fingers, typing on about how the MN deer numbers suck.
All that said, I really believe the key to turning things around is to continue pushing the DNR in ways you already are. At the same time, you need to do whatever you're willing to change your own hunting practices and habitat to build deer numbers on a micro level. Last year at this time the deer numbers on the ground I manage in C MN were pathetic. One year later, they aren't bad. Next year, they'll likely be exactly what I want.
Now, in fairness, we're talking a good sized piece of ground. Still, it wouldn't take that many landowners coming together to achieve the same results. The question is if the landowners are willing to do and sacrifice at a similar level. Simply put, you improve the cover, add a bunch of food and essentially not hunt a piece of ground for a season and you suck in a lot of the area's deer. No doubt, it helps a ton when you have tags for other states to fill and are talking about a good sized chunk of dirt. That said, I'd have taken the exact same approach if I controlled a 40, lived in MN and had no other tags. I just would have spent the year pretending I was hunting the snot out of that 40 (to keep locals from trespassing) while spending all my time hunting public lands and leaving my 40 alone during deer season. For many, not all, that want to change things you can on a micro level. The question is if you are willing to do what it takes. What it takes sucks, but does it suck more than what you have now?
You guys have a tremendously unfair advantage to making this work. You have this forum, with a ton of expertise on it and a bunch of people from MN here that generally want the same thing. If I were in your shoes, I'd start a thread today on what can be done on the micro level to build your deer numbers and hunting quality. A no complaint zone, if you will, that focuses 100% on finding solutions for your individual properties. At the same time, I'd be working on my neighbors to do the same. If you can get them to buy in you're job just got easier. If they don't,
#@$%$# them and do it yourself. I get all the venting, but you already have plenty of threads for that. Have at least one that focuses on solutions. For many of you, you can solve your micro problem to at least a significant extent. For those of you that can, the question really is if it's worth it to you to do so. That's something that only you can answer.
Sorry if that came off preachy. If I get some grief for this post, I'll understand and not hold it against anyone. That said, I honestly believe what I wrote and hope it's taken the way it's meant. I know how cheesy it sounds, but you guys are my friends and I don't want to see you in this same situation 10 years from now.
