wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
He had his chance, he dropped the ball, he got benched, next up.
Wassup peeps?!?!?!?
- Thread starter thayer
- Start date
- Status
thayer
A good 3 year old buck
Who do you think the legislative office is gonna hire? In state science...out of state science? If its in state science...are not they on the books already? If it's an out of state scientist....maybe they were bought off? Just like Dr. deer coming to Missouri to say that cwd is a natural disease to our legislature. You have some absurd thoughts my friend. It is a process with many votes and facts put forward and pushing this thing thru like a bull dozer is not the right way to get it done for the future. Like I said in my original post a year ago. Blowing this thing up on many forums is not the answer. The answer is education of the public. Many ways to reach the public...how do you want to do it?
Jim Timber
5 year old buck +
Funny, I've never seen anyone here in our government, at any level, who said "What's the QDMA's position on this?" That is, once you eliminate the advocates from Rum River branch from your trumpeting of success (still not sure what success that is, but I'll grant you the RR branch gets your name associated with the DNR online anyway). We all know if a certain someone wasn't still trying to work from within your system that you'd have Zero presence in any published or even internet chatter on the subject.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
What was the QDMA doing to educate in MN? I didn't see their membership or influence in the state skyrocket in the face of declining deer numbers due them bringing good science to the attention to the general hunting public of MN. They barely even acknowledged that there was an issue, much less went to bat for them when they needed it. As far as Dr. Kroll, I hate him and what he stands for just as much or more than anyone, but we had him in WI long before he went to MO and if the first couple years of our process that came from a "paid-off" out of state biologists recommendations are any indication, it seems to be working pretty well.
Jim Timber
5 year old buck +
Which we're doing, despite the pressure NOT TO from the QDMA. And it's working. ;)
I guess this site was anti QDMA. Maybe a few of you have an axe to grind, but why can't you just accept someone here and maybe he can add to the discussions. I just can't believe Thayer comes here and some of you decide to drop the hammer.
I for one am glad that anyone is welcome here and as far as I am concerned this being an anti qdma site is really sillly. I would hope john would not want this brand to be run as anti qdma. But, that is for him to decide.
I for one am glad that anyone is welcome here and as far as I am concerned this being an anti qdma site is really sillly. I would hope john would not want this brand to be run as anti qdma. But, that is for him to decide.
thayer
A good 3 year old buck
I am not here for the qdma. I wanted to come here and meet up with old friends. I won't go to the qdma site....go look.
I wanted to learn about different techniques to enrich my soil for p and k since that well will dry up soon.
I wanted to share my experiences. I didn't want to get into bullshit debates like before...but oh well.
Seems like the fight continues.
I wanted to learn about different techniques to enrich my soil for p and k since that well will dry up soon.
I wanted to share my experiences. I didn't want to get into bullshit debates like before...but oh well.
Seems like the fight continues.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
It worked in WI and it is working in MN. QDMA wasn't really in the conversation in the WI audit process a few years back either(other than a few guys from the state branch that may or may not have had the blessings of corporate HQ) and we got many good changes here in WI, a few things need tweaking, but we are doing that without the help of QDMA as well, so I'm not really sure where your getting your information from?
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Well you seem to be of the opinion that no one can get anything done within the world of whitetail management without the full blessing and backing of the QDMA, and that is just not the case. Sorry to disappoint you thayer, but it got done in WI and it is getting done in MN, without the help of QDMA.
Jim Timber
5 year old buck +
I don't see this "site" as anti-QDMA, but there's a lot of hostility and resentment from fresh wounds in our struggles with them and trying to get the State to fix our problems - in ways only legislation can (sometimes).
The other fresh wounds are from how folks were treated over there when trying to find solutions.
Hopefully we can move past the past, and this discussion just proves we have differences in opinion on certain facts, and what was/should've been done, and how to get where we want to be (good deer hunting again).
SD51555
5 year old buck +
You gotta remember that everyone tried operating within the system to begin with. One by one, everyone that was supposed to be our allies and intellectual betters told us there was no problem, there were tons of deer, that we must be in a cold pocket in a hot zone, that all the deer in the wooded north were in corn fields hiding from wind and rain for the past ten years. Only problem with that is there are no corn fields in the 100 zone. The area managers, the DNR brass, the outdoor press, MDHA, all blew us off as a bunch of lazy ineffective greedy rednecks.
We ended up with the audit because that was the only avenue left that could be driven by any Joe Sixpack and it couldn't be stonewalled. Even the politicians that supported us wanted to drop it after the informational hearing. Frankly that was a show and nothing more. Thankfully we had a handful of legislators that really cared and helped steer us in the right direction. Now it's moving, and everyone that was sitting on their hands, or fighting against us, wants to hop on and steer it and take credit now that we've got something started.
We ended up with the audit because that was the only avenue left that could be driven by any Joe Sixpack and it couldn't be stonewalled. Even the politicians that supported us wanted to drop it after the informational hearing. Frankly that was a show and nothing more. Thankfully we had a handful of legislators that really cared and helped steer us in the right direction. Now it's moving, and everyone that was sitting on their hands, or fighting against us, wants to hop on and steer it and take credit now that we've got something started.
tooln
5 year old buck +
Wow this thread took off like a rocket. I'd just like to see everyone get along. We all have our own reasons why we left and came here. Personally I call this home. I learned a lot from the other site but more here. From what I've seen on both I got to give the MN guys a thumbs up for all the good they have done here. If nothing else the word had gotten out.
Riggsgwp->
5 year old buck +
I don't see this either as an anti-qdma site because John said he doesn't want to see the discussion here. Thayer ran his mouth on the other site and now he's here to see all his buddies but they don't exist. Thayer I'm guessing you're probably happy the discussion turned to QDMA cause if you call me a whiner I will make it about you. You will either fit in here or not but it seems you have a tough road ahead of you due to your comments in the past, not your beloved association.
Last edited:
sandbur
5 year old buck +
Thayer-I hope we can get past this and you can share habitat information with us.
I will issue a few comments and then try to remain quiet on the subject of QDMA.
I was a member for about 20 years. I feel the organization has lost it's way like another Mn. organization. I am trying to make some changes at a local level in the Mn. org. It might not work, but local guys see the light if given good information.
QDMA is not the end all on deer or land management. It is very far from it and the organization just has not woken up to management north of the Mason Dixon line, and especially in areas of declining deer numbers.
QDMA sold out one chapter, other members, and a non existant chapter for their Deer Summit.
We have made strides without QDMA and too some extent without our state MDHA organization. A few MDHA chapters have supported our efforts.
Working with QDMA would have been years of rhetoric and nothing getting accomplished. Take a look at what NDA has done-nothing! We have had enough of that and it is time for change in our state.
I still have hard feelings about QDMA and their lack of knowledge about the situation in Mn. Kips comments reflect that he does not know what is going on. I have visited with other QDMA board members and they are clueless. All QDMA talks about is the success in SE Mn.
The truth is we have state wildlife managers in other parts of the state that wish to drive deer numbers to very low numbers. They have no interest in deer, even though deer licenses pay most of their salaries. They just wish to keep issuing 5, 6, 7, or 8 doe licenses.
Just an example from my zone. Our state manager wanted to issue up to 35,000 doe licenses in an area with a population of about 5600 deer over 1 year of age. Do I need to repeat those numbers? Kids were going on their first hunt and not seeing a deer. My wife and I hunted a 9 deer firearm season on our farm and saw one deer. Yet Kip and QDMA are saying that the Mn. DNR is doing a great job and look at how SE Mn. is working out. SE Mn. is just a tiny part of the state.
It was time to take action on our own and boot QDMA out the door.
Minnesota deer hunters have decided to become a strong voice in our deer management. We will speak out and we will put pressure on our wildlife managers. Cooperation gets results, but pressure needs to be applied for change if years of cooperation have yielded nothing but low deer numbers.
Thayer-my blood boils over this.
I will try and move on and hope you continue to share habitat knowledge on this site.
I welcome you and hope we can both stick to habitat.
I will issue a few comments and then try to remain quiet on the subject of QDMA.
I was a member for about 20 years. I feel the organization has lost it's way like another Mn. organization. I am trying to make some changes at a local level in the Mn. org. It might not work, but local guys see the light if given good information.
QDMA is not the end all on deer or land management. It is very far from it and the organization just has not woken up to management north of the Mason Dixon line, and especially in areas of declining deer numbers.
QDMA sold out one chapter, other members, and a non existant chapter for their Deer Summit.
We have made strides without QDMA and too some extent without our state MDHA organization. A few MDHA chapters have supported our efforts.
Working with QDMA would have been years of rhetoric and nothing getting accomplished. Take a look at what NDA has done-nothing! We have had enough of that and it is time for change in our state.
I still have hard feelings about QDMA and their lack of knowledge about the situation in Mn. Kips comments reflect that he does not know what is going on. I have visited with other QDMA board members and they are clueless. All QDMA talks about is the success in SE Mn.
The truth is we have state wildlife managers in other parts of the state that wish to drive deer numbers to very low numbers. They have no interest in deer, even though deer licenses pay most of their salaries. They just wish to keep issuing 5, 6, 7, or 8 doe licenses.
Just an example from my zone. Our state manager wanted to issue up to 35,000 doe licenses in an area with a population of about 5600 deer over 1 year of age. Do I need to repeat those numbers? Kids were going on their first hunt and not seeing a deer. My wife and I hunted a 9 deer firearm season on our farm and saw one deer. Yet Kip and QDMA are saying that the Mn. DNR is doing a great job and look at how SE Mn. is working out. SE Mn. is just a tiny part of the state.
It was time to take action on our own and boot QDMA out the door.
Minnesota deer hunters have decided to become a strong voice in our deer management. We will speak out and we will put pressure on our wildlife managers. Cooperation gets results, but pressure needs to be applied for change if years of cooperation have yielded nothing but low deer numbers.
Thayer-my blood boils over this.
I will try and move on and hope you continue to share habitat knowledge on this site.
I welcome you and hope we can both stick to habitat.
*Hawaii5joe*
5 year old buck +
99.9% of the time you will not hear these guys bashing QDMA anymore.
Last edited:
- Status
