New MN DNR deer leader wants herds eradicated

[h2ofwlr]

Not being allowed to take does during bow season in NE MN is idiotic. Thanks DNR

I disagree.

How to bring about more deer is quite simple:
Don't shoot the does.
How to reduce the deer herd?
Shoot does.


As for the Wolves:
Just remember that the MN DNR for years wanted to manage the wolf pop in MN. But the anti radicals and judges Fd them from doing that. So meanwhile the deer herd in the NE 1/3 in recent years has taken a clobbering by the wolves. And the livestock predation goes on. I heard another family dog was killed in the farm yard in central Mn last week by the wolves. Oh yea, sure - the wolves are "afraid" of people. Pure BS. When they are starving they get brazen and do what ever it takes to eat. The deer don't stand a chance. As a result I wonder how many wolves are being gut shot so that they die hours or days later so no one finds them? VS by humanely trapping and hunting them and kill them cleanly?

[Mallard_maniac]

[ As a result I wonder how many wolves are being gut shot so that they die hours or days later so no one finds them? VS by humanely trapping and hunting them and kill them cleanly?

Hopefully lots

[hobbydog]

I live in a "has been" intensive harvest zone. We went from 5 deer to 1(hunters choice) to 1(bucks only, lottery doe) in 2 off seasons. I brought my concern to our local wildlife official and he had some pretty fascinating statistics that debunked my questions. On a statewide level, in intensive harvest zones, the percentage of hunters that took 2 deer was somewhere around 10%. But the percentage of hunters that took 3, 4 or 5 all were under 1%. Long story short, intensive harvest (although perceived to be) wasn't playing a huge role in reduction. I was very much against it until looked at his numbers. There were 2 winters that took a severe toll, as well as the ongoing "predator" issue that we can no longer control.

I don't buy those numbers. When they went to 5 deer they basically said shoot all you want. Do you think that those who shot 5 registered all of them? I am talking about the locals. They used to have to buy full priced tags for all the women and children and then be sneaky. Your naive if you think party hunting doesn't bring a lot of abuse. It was like legal poaching for them.The same ones who now blame the wolves for lack of deer. Everyone forgets about the QDM aspect. They pushed hard for the doe harvest to get "buck doe ratio" in line. They lobbied hard...especially in NW and SW MN. They got what they wanted but are silent now.

[get-n-birdy]

Great points and would agree to some extent. I think it's kind of skewed with party hunting. It's very common for tag beggers to utilize party hunting to it's fullest limits. I'd bet a lot of killers don't buy more than one bonus tags if that or register deer off their own tags. Guys who hunt all 3 weapons are really good at finding someone with a tag they'll give up and put on a deer that they shot. Understand the dnr's stats and even still it's probably not a huge deal. But I'd be willing to be the killers in a group can really up a camp or party's harvest numbers, but not with their own tags being put on deer they are responsible for harvesting. If that makes any farking sense? Would also assume with no proof those killers are more willing to kill does and fawns in those years, knowing bonus tags are easily available. And even still ne mn has 3 big predators other than human deer hunters. Winter, vehicles and wolves.

If you could predict bad winters, harvesting more animals might be a good thing? Being the weather is going to ultimately lead to a high percentage of the herds mortality. But is it better to leave as much seed stock in the herd as possible or thin it so the rest have a better chance for survival, much like thinning a garden? I sure as heck have no clue.

[get-n-birdy]

Great points hobby dog!

Just about every deer camp pushes the legal limits of party hunting.

I use to think the qdma was good, then bad, now I'm somewhere in the middle. A lot of their theories are based in areas that couldn't even tell you what a winter severity index is or have 5,000 after pup wolf numbers.

[Mallard_maniac]

I don't buy those numbers. .

Buy them or not that's what they are... It's not opinion its base line data..... think about it. 10% of roughly 440,000 hunters is 44,000. So those people are accounting for 88,000 deer, now factor that on a good year we were shooting somewhere in the neighborhood of 270,000 deer those 44,000 are accounting for roughly 1/3 of the overall harvest.

When they went to 5 deer they basically said shoot all you want. Do you think that those who shot 5 registered all of them?

Nope I don't but I don't believe that so many were being shot and unregistered that it would drastically change the statistics. Generously speaking you might gain 1% overall.

I am talking about the locals. They used to have to buy full priced tags for all the women and children and then be sneaky.

I'm a "local" in the 100 series area. I can tell you our largest enforcement/poaching/party hunting/Baiting/trespass issues come not from other locals. Sure we have a few local guys that are well known poachers but every area does and once again, what they kill wouldn't change the overall number a great deal.
Go ahead and talk with any MN game warden about this. I have and regarding ours specifically almost every call he takes during rifle season deals with some maggot from the concrete wasteland to the south. I've lived in all 4 corners of the state and this is almost always the case. During our intensive harvest, the most deer I ever shot in a season, in MN was 3. Most years I shot 2, a couple years I shot 1. Most of my "local" friends, family and co-workers have been in the same ballpark and self governed themselves during those years and stopped when they deemed they had enough...... And keep in mind, for every person out there that was shooting 2 or more deer there were still many people eating tag soup. I know my grandfather did for the last 10 years of his life, of course it's tough to kill them off the deck but he bought a tag regardless.

Your naive if you think party hunting doesn't bring a lot of abuse. It was like legal poaching for them.

You're spot on there... MN Is in the stone ages in regards to party hunting. It's disgusting really.

The same ones who now blame the wolves for lack of deer.

If you don't think they're playing a part in it, you should live up here.

Everyone forgets about the QDM aspect. They pushed hard for the doe harvest to get "buck doe ratio" in line. They lobbied hard...especially in NW and SW MN. They got what they wanted but are silent now.

We're not silent. I'm a strong advocate of QDM, and Manage my farm for it. The hardest lobby from them came in the SE part of the state and we pretty much had to settle for a comprimise with the APR. Minnesota is hands down the worst managed state for whitetails in the entire mid-west, maybe even the country. If you're used to being the worst it's not so bad but remember, at one point we were both the number 1 B&C producing state in the nation and had the #1 B&C producing county in the nation. Both of those have been lost to states that are managing better and more effectively. While other neighboring states are either flourishing or maintaining, we continue to decline. Yes the winters in MN can suck but southern Iowa has bouts of EHD and other disease, and still continues to be a 3 year wait to archery hunt, for 700$ by the time you're done with pref. points. I could go on and on for days regarding QDM. The economics (millions and longterm, billions) were losing as a state but to summarize: MN needs to push their gun season out of the rut and I doubt this kid will do it. I have a feeling our deer season structure comes from the commisioner, or possibly even higher with politcal ties. Most big game managers (ours are not an exception) will agree that QDM works. However we have 1/2 million uneducated pumpkins that head out of the cities on Friday night before opener, stop at Gander to pick up some slugs and a bottle of doe pee, and go out to shoot da' turdy pointer, that unfortunately have a voice.

Meanwhile No other state with a prize big game animal, let alone the largest revenue-producing big game animal in the world, would continue to hunt a VERY stressed deer herd during their most vulnerable time (rut) with the most amount of hunters (can push 1/2 million) with the most effective weapon (centerfire rifle). It is purely stupid.

[hobbydog]

I don't buy those numbers. .

Buy them or not that's what they are... It's not opinion its base line data..... think about it. 10% of roughly 440,000 hunters is 44,000. So those people are accounting for 88,000 deer, now factor that on a good year we were shooting somewhere in the neighborhood of 270,000 deer those 44,000 are accounting for roughly 1/3 of the overall harvest.

440,000 hunters but not all of them hunted intensive harvest areas. Not all intensive harvest areas were created equal. Most in central Mn were private lands for the most part. My frame of reference is NW MN....Eastern Kittson and Roseau counties where there is large tracks of public land mixed in with private land. Intensive harvest tags brought in more hunters from other areas. They came for the intensive harvest on public land. So while overall 1% may be a good number I argue that some areas got hit much harder. Part of deer management in MN has been to manage by zones. They messed this one up.

When they went to 5 deer they basically said shoot all you want. Do you think that those who shot 5 registered all of them?

Nope I don't but I don't believe that so many were being shot and unregistered that it would drastically change the statistics. Generously speaking you might gain 1% overall.

Again...in the big picture maybe, but I argue that MN registration policies are extremely lame and easy to circumvent. No malicious intent, just to lazy to do it. There is such an anti DNR bent in these areas they do it in protest.

I am talking about the locals. They used to have to buy full priced tags for all the women and children and then be sneaky.

I'm a "local" in the 100 series area. I can tell you our largest enforcement/poaching/party hunting/Baiting/trespass issues come not from other locals. Sure we have a few local guys that are well known poachers but every area does and once again, what they kill wouldn't change the overall number a great deal.
Go ahead and talk with any MN game warden about this. I have and regarding ours specifically almost every call he takes during rifle season deals with some maggot from the concrete wasteland to the south. I've lived in all 4 corners of the state and this is almost always the case. During our intensive harvest, the most deer I ever shot in a season, in MN was 3. Most years I shot 2, a couple years I shot 1. Most of my "local" friends, family and co-workers have been in the same ballpark and self governed themselves during those years and stopped when they deemed they had enough...... And keep in mind, for every person out there that was shooting 2 or more deer there were still many people eating tag soup. I know my grandfather did for the last 10 years of his life, of course it's tough to kill them off the deck but he bought a tag regardless.

This is likely true on areas where it is primarily private land. The locals have a much easier time of concealing it than someone in a temporary deer camp. It is just to easy to haul it to the shed, peel and quarter it over a few light beers with the party and take it to the home freezer.

Your naive if you think party hunting doesn't bring a lot of abuse. It was like legal poaching for them.

You're spot on there... MN Is in the stone ages in regards to party hunting. It's disgusting really.

The same ones who now blame the wolves for lack of deer.

If you don't think they're playing a part in it, you should live up here.

I didn't say wolves were not an issue. Wolves, winters and overharvest during the firearms season were a trifecta that hurt the herd as bad as the back to back bad winters in in 96 and 97. Wolves are worse now and it is not recovering as fast as it did back then.

Everyone forgets about the QDM aspect. They pushed hard for the doe harvest to get "buck doe ratio" in line. They lobbied hard...especially in NW and SW MN. They got what they wanted but are silent now.

We're not silent. I'm a strong advocate of QDM, and Manage my farm for it. The hardest lobby from them came in the SE part of the state and we pretty much had to settle for a comprimise with the APR. Minnesota is hands down the worst managed state for whitetails in the entire mid-west, maybe even the country. If you're used to being the worst it's not so bad but remember, at one point we were both the number 1 B&C producing state in the nation and had the #1 B&C producing county in the nation. Both of those have been lost to states that are managing better and more effectively. While other neighboring states are either flourishing or maintaining, we continue to decline. Yes the winters in MN can suck but southern Iowa has bouts of EHD and other disease, and still continues to be a 3 year wait to archery hunt, for 700$ by the time you're done with pref. points. I could go on and on for days regarding QDM. The economics (millions and longterm, billions) were losing as a state but to summarize: MN needs to push their gun season out of the rut and I doubt this kid will do it. I have a feeling our deer season structure comes from the commisioner, or possibly even higher with politcal ties. Most big game managers (ours are not an exception) will agree that QDM works. However we have 1/2 million uneducated pumpkins that head out of the cities on Friday night before opener, stop at Gander to pick up some slugs and a bottle of doe pee, and go out to shoot da' turdy pointer, that unfortunately have a voice.

Meanwhile No other state with a prize big game animal, let alone the largest revenue-producing big game animal in the world, would continue to hunt a VERY stressed deer herd during their most vulnerable time (rut) with the most amount of hunters (can push 1/2 million) with the most effective weapon (centerfire rifle). It is purely stupid.

Not true. Sen Stumpf lobbied long and hard for QDMA in NW MN. QDMA had a lot of backing from landowners in the Greenbush area. He was a driving force in getting this area into the intensive harvest in NW MN.QDMA can work where there is a lot of private land or all public but the mix of the two did not work. Landowners would drive the pizz out of the public land by day and sit in their private stands morning and evening. They wanted does shot....just not on their private land. At least that is my view from my small slice of MN. Last year was the first year in 40 years that I did not hunt deer. It has just gotten so f'ing crazy.

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-114338332.html

[Mallard_maniac]

Not true. Sen Stumpf lobbied long and hard for QDMA in NW MN. QDMA had a lot of backing from landowners in the Greenbush area. He was a driving force in getting this area into the intensive harvest in NW MN.QDMA can work where there is a lot of private land or all public but the mix of the two did not work. Landowners would drive the pizz out of the public land by day and sit in their private stands morning and evening. They wanted does shot....just not on their private land. At least that is my view from my small slice of MN. Last year was the first year in 40 years that I did not hunt deer. It has just gotten so f'ing crazy.

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-114338332.html

I'm confused here. QDMA is an association so was he lobbying hard for QDMA to start a chapter in NW MN? Regardless I believe you're meaning he was arguing hard for QDM to be applied to the area and although local legislators sometimes get on board, pushing it through the commisioner and probably even the governor's office fall's on def ears. Further more simply converting a zone into intensive harvest, and slapping on an APR isn't neccessarily QDM. I honestly don't think APRs are all that good of QDM for biological reasons. They're better than nothing but 1 1/2 YO deer with good genetics are still fair game. I would still argue that the bluffland whitetails association have fought harder than anyone in MN for some sort of QDM and did infact win a small battle compromising with an APR. Their initial request to move the gun season post rut was quickly denied.

Long story short..... it works where applied. Just ask central kansas.... there's an abundance of private and WIA's both. And as we all know, monster deer coming off of both. Heck just ask SE MN, last year (Fall2014) was what year 3 or 4 of their APR? and they magically had 9 or 10 B&C entries? A HUGE portion of SE MN is the RJD Memorial State Forest broke up with tons of private land.

[hobbydog]

Not true. Sen Stumpf lobbied long and hard for QDMA in NW MN. QDMA had a lot of backing from landowners in the Greenbush area. He was a driving force in getting this area into the intensive harvest in NW MN.QDMA can work where there is a lot of private land or all public but the mix of the two did not work. Landowners would drive the pizz out of the public land by day and sit in their private stands morning and evening. They wanted does shot....just not on their private land. At least that is my view from my small slice of MN. Last year was the first year in 40 years that I did not hunt deer. It has just gotten so f'ing crazy.

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-114338332.html

I'm confused here. QDMA is an association so was he lobbying hard for QDMA to start a chapter in NW MN? Regardless I believe you're meaning he was arguing hard for QDM to be applied to the area and although local legislators sometimes get on board, pushing it through the commisioner and probably even the governor's office fall's on def ears. Further more simply converting a zone into intensive harvest, and slapping on an APR isn't neccessarily QDM. I honestly don't think APRs are all that good of QDM for biological reasons. They're better than nothing but 1 1/2 YO deer with good genetics are still fair game. I would still argue that the bluffland whitetails association have fought harder than anyone in MN for some sort of QDM and did infact win a small battle compromising with an APR. Their initial request to move the gun season post rut was quickly denied.

Long story short..... it works where applied. Just ask central kansas.... there's an abundance of private and WIA's both. And as we all know, monster deer coming off of both. Heck just ask SE MN, last year (Fall2014) was what year 3 or 4 of their APR? and they magically had 9 or 10 B&C entries? A HUGE portion of SE MN is the RJD Memorial State Forest broke up with tons of private land.

The local chapter there basically owned him or he was a member. He couldn't get one in NW MN but he did get it done in the other corner of the state. Look at the difference it the amount of public land in the two areas. There has never been a problem with under harvesting does on public land in MN but there is on private land. I am not saying QDM doesn't work when applied in the right places but I don't think it works well when you have winters and wolves in the mix. NW MN was a bad place to propose doing this.
http://www.brainerddispatch.com/content/quality-deer-management-get-tryout

A meeting on Monday in Stumpf's office at the state Capitol included Stumpf, Peterson, Clyde Stephens of the Minnesota QDM Association, DNR Commissioner Gene Merriam, Deputy Commissioner Mark Holsten, Big Game Specialist Lou Cornicelli and Fish and Wildlife Director John Guenther. According to Stephens, the tone of the meeting was positive.
The proposed pilot hunt would be a nine-day season from Nov. 6-14 in Kittson, Marshall, Pennington and Roseau counties. Hunters would not be allowed to shoot bucks whose antlers do not exceed the width of their ears or which do not have at least four points per side. Youths ages 12-14 would be exempt from the rule.

[Drunk_Dynasty]

[quote="Quack"]Not being allowed to take does during bow season in NE MN is idiotic. Thanks DNR

I'll buy that,

It's not a big deal to me, I wouldn't burn an either-sex archery tag on a doe in NE MN anyway but for new archery hunters (kids, women, new adult male archers) this seems to do more harm than good. You're probably talking an additional 500 (really maybe less) animals total that might be harvested throughout the entire 100 zone during bow season but on the flip side possibly frustrating new hunters. In the long run this seems like a poor investment.[/quote]

Lmao at putting all women bow hunters on the same level kids and new male archers hahahahahaha