UofM Doing Satisfaction Survey For DNR

[SD51555]

My brother hunted our zone up north for the first time last year. He received a survey letter from the U of M today. I'm pasting below for all to see. Anyone wonder why he was selected for feedback on satisfaction given that was the first time he selected that zone on his doe permit? He didn't hunt within a 150 miles of there ever before.

The letter may be hard to read due to size of the picture. If you hit hold down the control key and press the + sign it will make your screen zoom in.

 

[SD51555]

I'll talk to him in the morning and see if he'll let me do it for him, and I can snip it all out.

 

[biglakeba$$]

I have the screen shots... I tried posting them earlier on my topic. :P

 

[SD51555]

Here's what it was:

 

[SD51555]

I have the screen shots... I tried posting them earlier on my topic. :p

Sorry BLB, I missed it. We got em up there now.

 

[bat man]

If that is the whole survey everybody should step back realize the gains we have made focusing on deer numbers. The entire survey is about herd size. The focus of the upcoming process appears to be on nothing but herd size.

Here is a quote from the 2005 survey. They claimed the current strategies had reduced deer numbers to goal, but wanted to keep shrinking the herd. The focus was clearly stated to be finding means to increase the doe harvest to shrink the herd.


They also afraid of LOU (Land Owners United. I really like that acronym because we can say 'LOU says'. Cornicelli would approve?)

I believe the realize they are dancing the line right now where the hunting public is ready to strike off on their own and ignore the DNR. THe don't want the problems Wisconsin has. Read the last sentence below in the quip below.


If this is the entire survey we definitely have their ear. Lets go for the 50% increases unless the have actual data to support the social claims that deer are a menace at those levels.

 

[foggy]

To clarify......50% increase means that if you currently have 10 deer per square mile.....a 50% increase means 15 dpsm. correct?

 

[biglakeba$$]

Good job SD.

 

[foggy]

Correct.

One reason why in a unit like 221 we don't want to use the aerial data from last year is that if we successfully get a 50% increase on 7.2 dpsm, that unit would now have a goal of 10-11 dpsm. Not a huge "coup" IMHO.

i think this may become a problem in many areas. the stakeholders will agree to 10% increase and everyone will think they solved the problem.....except for us. big whoop

 

[SD51555]

I was chomping at the bit to make that point. I would have selected a 500% increase if that was an option. What is 50% from 2? It's 3.

Or, what is 1200% of nothing? Still nothing.

 

[bat man]

Don't sell us short. The survey was 6 weeks late because they had to redo it. They took everything out but the deer number issue. If their satisfaction rating on the survey starts to drop, they realize they are getting closer to losing control of the deer herd.

We are way further along than I had thought.

Added one more question to the list this am-

Hunters in parts of the state took a watch and learn approach during last winters meetings in SE Minnesota, and their big question is 'If we vote in 50% increases for parts of the state at this winters stakeholder meetings, is the DNR going to rubber stamp them like they promised in SE Minnesota (and later went back on their word), or are our suspicions correct that the process is one big smoke and mirrors process with a pre determined outcome?

 

[SD51555]

Count me as "out" of the base level support camp.

 

[foggy]

perhaps these Multilple of scenarios of dpsm (pre-fawn) and % of increase = x number of deer could be part of Batmans presentation??

Some folks need to be hit with a wet mop to know what they will do to the populations. They may think 10% is a big deal. Just saying.

Thinking here would show 7, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20 dpsm (pre-fawn) and increases of 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 75%, 100%, 200% (give a few high ones to throw out and meet in the "middle" :D)

Think about this: 7 DPSM and 200% increase is still ONLY 21 DPSM. (or is it 28?) Sounds like a HUGE number.....but....

 

[biglakeba$$]

Here is the phone number to the guy coordinating this survey in case anyone missed it in SD's first post.

I called and left a VM asking if I can take the survey.

612-624-7495

 

[foggy]

.......also note the survey. They show a "middle ground increase" of about 10%. It's like the survey is rigged to get folks to think that the 10% increase in dpsm will really have an effect. 50% is "Very Significant"......when, in fact, 50% in some areas may not be adequate.


I dunno....but when I sold commodities.....we'd often try for a 10% price increase, and often settle for 3%. If you'd ask for 3% you'd get 1%. Just saying.....dont let a high requested number scare you.

NOTICE THAT THE SURVEY QUESTION ALSO SHOWS SIMILAR DECREASES in DPSM! o_O

 

[bat man]

What if I told you they sold 7,100 firearms tags in a unit that was managed for 4,400 adult deer. And then we let 3,127 bowhunters give it a whirl and then 1,587 muzzleloaders hunted the rest of the season.

Thats 11,814 licenses to in an area managed for 4,400 deer. As a stakeholder representing the hunters, would a 50% increase seem out of line?

 

[SD51555]

What if I told you they sold 7,100 firearms tags in a unit that was managed for 4,400 adult deer. And then we let 3,127 bowhunters give it a whirl and then 1,587 muzzleloaders hunted the rest of the season.

Thats 11,814 licenses to in an area managed for 4,400 deer. As a stakeholder representing the hunters, would a 50% increase seem out of line?

Don't think 50 would fix it if it gets wiped out first. Someone made the point earlier about managing to a quantity and not a percentage. I like that idea.

 

[West Branch]

I just helped my dad complete the survey. some of the questions were a bit different than the ones SD posted.

 

[Riggsgwp->]

I got a survey in the mail and was all excited to fill it out just to find out it was a damn turkey survey:( how convenient that the first year I kill a turkey is the same year I get a turkey survey. I'm betting the system is more than rigged.

 

[biglakeba$$]

West Branch,
There was a hunter survey and a landowner survey sent out.