Is the DNR taking the right approach to Deer Management in MN?

[BLACKJACK]

Lots of good input here!!! People are passionate about their deer hunting but the problem is that hunters have different goals. I'm going to lump deer hunters into three catagories:

1) The "horn porn" guys, all they want is big antlers.

2) The "meat hunters", they just want venison in the freezer.

3) The in-betweeners that like venison, yes they'd like to shoot a big buck but realize a six point or even a doe is a trophy.

I think the vast majority of hunters fit into categories 2 and 3. From that standpoint, I think its unfair for the horn porn guys to try and restrict the rest of the hunters, just because they want a "big" buck. To the majority of hunters, that 6 point is a trophy. What does it say about our deer hunting culture when people are looked down on because "they just shot a doe (or forkhorn)". Plus --- I see lots of big buck pictures in the Outdoor News, local papers, and bait shops, if you're a big buck hunter, go hunt one of them down!!! Don't expect the DNR to legislate a big buck behind every bush!!!

You ask any deer hunter "would you like to shoot bigger bucks", of course they'd say yes. But then if they realize what the restrictions would be, that there might be years where they can't shoot any deer, that would cool their enthusiasm.

Its easy to say 'if you want venison shoot a doe' but that doesn't work in the farmland parts of the state, zone 426 where I hunted had only 15 doe permits!!!

I'm against antler point restictions, they've been tried in other states and have been proven not to work, the deer just get cropped off at that level, plus you end up with too many shot and wasted deer.

Earn a buck is fine, but only in parts of the state where there are a lot of deer.

I'd favor moving the deer season out of the rut but it won't happen, too much tradition.

I'd also favor stopping party hunting for bucks but that would be unenforceable.

Back to the original question, I think the DNR is doing a great job!!! They are surveying hunters and actually listening to them and instituting changes to meet those hunter goals.

[Scoot]

DeanoB- I disagree regarding "it's not rocket science" (kind of). It's absolutely not rocket science, but it's also not even close to as clear and obvious as you suggest it is. MN has a huge deer population and to suggest that the management of that herd isn't a large reason for fewer big bucks than could be is simply wrong. Regardless of the state's population, a state can be managed effectively for bigger bucks. To suggest that this isn't possible is completely contrary to all of the past data showing the effectiveness of many of the management strategies already mentioned in this thread. The effectiveness of these management techniques, of course, has been shown in both low and high population states.

But the three categories of hunters identified by BLACKJACK above this one is spot on (IMO) and points out that lots of people don't care too much about huge bucks (horn porn). That's totally fine by me, it's just different that I would like it to be. Other than voting in the link you provided (which is valuable and important- thanks for providing that), there's not much I can do other than to own my own land and manage it as I see fit.

[smnduck]

Very well said.

[Eric Wettschreck]

Remembering back to the 70's I think the DNR is doing a wonderful job. I remember the days when you were lucky to see a deer, let alone shoot at one. Now, there are many deer.

Minnesota is kinda 3 states in one. Prairie, hardwood forest, and softwood forest. 3 very different areas that have all seen an increase in deer. Once again, hats off to the DNR.

Do I want to shoot a monster buck? Duh, of course I do. More importantly to me, however, is getting a deer in the freezer every year. In this respect is the DNR taking the right approach??? I believe they are.

[96trigger]

EXACTLY, we are not going to get big bucks over night. In the last 30 years, the DNR has made it possible for everyone to go out and see and shoot deer. Which, I think is what the majority of the population wants. If you really want to go shoot a trophy buck, go find one, they are in Minnesota, you just have to find it, if you don't want to put the time in, spend the ching and go to a game farm. I like the fact that it took me years of hard hunting to finally get a deer close to Boone and Crocket, but I am still looking forward to 3B just as much. There are a ton of big deer shot in my part of the state. I have to think the DNR knows what they are doing. We have had great winters, and good management.

[Wanderer]

What do you guys think of this slippery slope?

I hunt in 4 very different habitats each year. SE, West Central, Central, and Northwoods.

VERY significant differences in deer population and ratios. Stress QDM as much as possible but when it comes down to it, if you want a deer, the fewer deer you see, the more valuable they become. Most will shoot SOMETHING if possible. Me included.

You can have patience and be selective when there are many to choose from.

I like the buck lottery idea myself, when populations allow it.

[Jim916]

I think the DNR is doing a good job also. There are big bucks out there, you just need to work for them. I have 2 friends, one last year and one this year, that shot 2 bucks each that scored above 120. The one was a 150 class. They worked hard for these bucks, a lot of scouting and hunting. I know it is not always easy to get to your hunting land to scout.

Also as someone pointed out if we had all of these big bucks the people with money would be leasing the hunting land. We are already having problems of losing hunting land to people leasing it out.

I also hunt 3A which is bucks only and a doe by permit. If you have a permit and shoot a doe, your main tag is no longer valid and you can not even shoot a buck. I used to shoot any buck I saw, but now I am letting them go by. One reason is I am going muzzleloader this year. The reason we do hunt 3A is there are a lot less hunters. 3B you see orange all over!!

Like several people have said you can not please everyone.

[brassman]

I would like to see the season moved back a week or two like others said to reduce the stress on little bucks if that was the only regulation change to be made.

I would also like to see that in intensive harvest area like mine where there are anywhere from 20 to 40 deer per square mile an earn a buck regulation. When I'm in my stand, I am extremeley lucky to see a buck but does are an everyday occurance. I have shot 6 does and one buck in the last 7 years and I am just as happy shooting a doe as I am shooting a buck. This year however I have limited myself to a buck with antlers outside his ears for my own personal enjoyment since I already have meat in the freezer from a doe I shot with my bow 2 weeks ago. If people were to shoot at least one doe to every buck, ( in the intensive harvest areas) it would balance the herd in a very healthy way. Ruts would be much more intense increasing buck activity and most importantly be healthy for all deer because it would take the pressure off of native browse allowing more deer to survive the winter with an abundance of food. My neighbor had to cut his cedars down in his front yard because they were mauled this last year. there are more deer than ever now and something needs to be done to control the levels making people shoot a doe before they shoot a buck would alleviate the numbers and help little bucks make it passed their first year.

[fishermatt]

I think the MN DNR is doing good with the diverse attitudes and traditions to deal with. Most hunters go through their own personal evolution with regard to what they shoot or don't shoot. Younger people want to shoot anything, and we shouldn't take away that right. As "some" people get older or have taken some deer, they may decide to wait and try for a bigger one. Many times that point happens when a hunter gets a Big Buck. Once you get a big buck, it's suddenly easier to pass on the smaller bucks. The average hunter doing the same thing as every other hunter can probably expect to get a few big bucks in a lifetime of deer hunting. If you want to get a big buck "consistently", don't expect the DNR to be able to help you. I think there are more big bucks than most people think. The big ones are out there right now, probably close to where you hunt. But they have a very strong sense of self preservation that you will have to learn to beat if you want to score big with consistency. I myself have definitely NOT learned this yet! Either that or you need a really, really good stand location

[sticknstring]

Quote:

---

Most hunters go through their own personal evolution with regard to what they shoot or don't shoot.

---

Precisely.

That's why my vote's for a later gun season... people can still shoot whatever they're so inclined as they progess through the different stages. The negatives of this change I've heard so far are colder temps and the beginning of yarding in certain herds. I realize tradition and vacation time and so forth all play a role as well... But what are some more reasons why one might be opposed to the change?

[Coach1310]

In response to what might be reasons against a later season...

1. Colder temps....leading to less hunter participation

2. Movement of deer to winter grounds causing more and more ground to be insufficient for hunting....leading to less hunter participation and overcrowding on certain lands

3. Moving it back would make it run concurrent with Wisconsin...I have no idea what the numbers are, but it would possibly decrease the numbers of hunters because with the seasons overlapping hunters would have to choose MN or WI....all 3 of these reasons would also lead to a decrease in revenue from license and tag purchases.

[bigbucks]

I too think the DNR is doing a good job. I would agree there maybe areas where Earn-A-Buck would be a good idea. If you're seeing 5 or more does to every buck your population is out of wack. I would say in our area I probably see no less than one buck for every two adult does, remember fawns don't count as they're essentially half of each gender. To me that doesn't mean the balance is out of wack, it means it's about right.

As stated in a different thread. We shot 11 deer for 16 hunters this weekend. We saw 3-5 does, 2 fawns, & 8-9 bucks. If that's unbalanced it's not because there are too many does. Now I realize were're talking on 250 acres, so the neighboring places could happen to have had nothing but does for that day & a half. In a short season it's tough to get an accurate read of the herd, however during bow season bucks were seen at probably a 2-1 ratio to does.

[sticknstring]

Quote:

---

I would say in our area I probably see no less than one buck for every two adult does

---

That's impressive. I'd venture a guess that our property is safely between 5:1 and 7:1. Ive seen well over a 100 does and fawns... and only 4 bucks. Granted you'll have repeat doe encounters... it's still a pretty big swing. The area is managed so I can only take one doe but a mile south it's intensive where you can take up to 5. I think a few must be creeping across the line...

[Dahitman44]

I am with you.

A buddy of mine is from PA and he can't believe we shoot deer under 8 points -- he said that was against the law where he comes from and I should be here as well.

Maybe a lottery system and a system for young hunters (16 and under) can take anything or you can apply for a young buck permit.

I only shoot an immature buck if we don't have any meat by the second day of gun. Only happened once.

Just my Buck and a Quarter.

Get it?

[eye1000us]

Generally I'd say the DNR is doing a good job of giving the majority of the people what they want while trying to maintain population goals. That said I don't think the DNR would have any trouble creating more trophy opportunities if thats what the people wanted. I think they could however do a better job of educating people on how deer populations and sex ratios effect the overall quality of the deer herd.We will never have the trophy opportunities they have in other states until the mind set of having to shoot a buck , any buck is changed.Doe meat tastes just as good and that fork horn is never gonna be a 10 pointer if you shoot him at a 1 1/2 years old.

I could see a system where your standard deer license comes with one antlerless tag , depending on the area ,additional antlerless tags may be available over the counter or thru a lottery system."Any deer" tags ,which would allow you to harvest either an additional antlerless deer or any buck would be available via a lottery.A "trophy tag" would be available over the counter but would come at a higher price and come with a set of antler restrictions that need to be adhered to.Those under 18 or those over 65 ( pick an age) would be issued special deer licenses that would be free from antlerless/buck restrictions.

I would also be in favor of moving the gun dates back a week. The arguments against this really don't seem to hold much water anymore. Generally our weather is getting warmer and warmer every fall so that shouldnt be too big of an issue.Is an overlap with the WI season a big deal? We have plenty of hunters here already, granted a minority may have to choose which state to hunt but so be it.

Overall its really more of a mind set change then anything.

Theres my $.02

[mattf]

DRH1175 I totally am like you,,,I have passed up 1.5 year hold bucks more than I can count in hopes to see them in future years. I don't think antler restriction is the answer though. I have hunted Iowa, SD, ND and wis. I would love to see Lottery for Bucks and does. Meaning applying for both. Iowa has a GREAT system,,hence why soo many monsters are shot. I would be willing to wait every other year to draw a tag. Also backing the gun season up two weeks would be great. Like you too,,,I don't get too much joy out of shooting a 4-5 point buck,,,not to mention they're the easiest deer in the woods to harvest......

[Dahitman44]

Eye is right, they should move the dates back a week.

The last (and only) nice buck I shot was a nice 9-pointer and it was 16 below at the farm that morning. It has not been nearly that cold since -- ?????

I think you know where I am going with that.

[B. Amish]

i think that moving the dates back won't have that big of an impact as far as less bucks being shot. with the sex ratios so out of whack, bucks are chasing and breeding does for the better part of a month and a half.

besides, the timeing of the rut doesn't conicide with such and such a day in November. it varies a little from year to year.

the only way to guarantee bigger bucks is too limit how many are shot each year.

[bigbucks]

I'd say we have a ratio like that mainly because we've never cared if a deer had horns or not. We also have shot plenty of fawns over the years. We shoot the deer that come by, not just the bucks, so every year we're taking roughly the same amount of deer. Some years we shoot mostly does, the next year it will be mostly bucks. Some years we've shot a lot of fawns. I agree they all eat good, unless they're too "mature". We don't worry about it too much.

Whoever said the yearling buck is the easiest deer in the woods to harvest is exactly right. Every year we pass on multiple small bucks bowhunting & a few fawns. Some times we can not get a doe in bow range all year & we bowhunt a lot. Other years we might get 2 or 3 does with bow. I definitely know, at least in our immediate area, that the gender ratio is NOT out of wack. If we'd have only shot the does we saw this year it would be, but it would be more bucks than does...

[fishermatt]

Bow Hunting would practically be a whole new sport in MN if they moved the Gun season back a week or 2. That would be FABULOUS for bow hunters. There would be a lot more natural daytime deer movement during the rut if it was Bow only til even the second weekend of November. Then Bowhunters would have a way better chance of seeing/bagging mature bucks. Gun season screws that up royally.

[PHESNTHNTR]

Boilerguy -- Do you think the deer population is good in our area ? I grew up hunting the Talcot Lake area, when we had to apply to get into that area during the Muzzleloader season, I remember driving by the refuge on the east side and the trees being lined up with deer. I haven't seen them up there like that for a few years now.

IMO the DNR completed limited the doe harvest this year in the SW part of the state, for example, Nobles County only got 100 doe permits for each of the 2 shotgun seasons. Jackson county which has been last year and previous years a management area, now was limited to 400 doe tags each shotgun weekend.

I agree with smnduck, he stated b/4 that what works in some parts of the state for deer management, won't work in others. You cannot do a earn a buck here. I like the move back a few weeks, that would put the ML season later, which doesn't bother me one bit.

[Hammer Handle]

I think the DNR is doing a great job.

If you "fined" for small bucks...they just won't be registered by a lot of people.

A trophy for me is a good eating deer. Yes, I would love to shot a large buck...but then what? The meat is not as near as tastey.

There are more deer and more big bucks now than in the past. Something is working.....

There are more bucks now and the ratio is way off. Probably due to applying for doe permits for many many years.

Get rid of party hunting? I sure hope not. So, if I had a deer and a wounded one cam by...can I shoot it? If 7 out of 9 hunters get a deer, how do you do a deer drive? Just have the two sit and let the deer run around them? Make drives illegal?

I like deer hunting the way it is.

[Eric Wettschreck]

Excellent question. Do I think the population is good??? Yes I do. Can it be better??? Yes it can. The real question is what do you consider good? Do you consider a lot of deer good or do you consider a lot fewer deer, but larger bucks good? Every persons version of QDM is different. To me the ability to shoot deer every year outweighs the chance every 4 years at a big buck. I'm different than many guys my age. I'm 40 and have shot my share of deer, including big bucks. I still would rather have a deer a year than a big boy every 4.

I feel the overall population of deer this year is down from the past couple of years, hence the reduction in doe tags. Hunter harvest the past few years has been high along with the coyote population. I've seen my share of fawn and yearling bones around yote dens.

I'll add, and not trying to sound rude, but this past weekend I missed the buck of a lifetime and I got the one in my avitar. Our group of 7 tagged 6 deer. We worked hard, very hard, for these deer, not just drive around in pick ups. If you've spent time slug hunting around here you know what I'm talking about. We saw our share of deer, but not from the road.

[realtower]

Im not sure how anyone can say the deer population is down. There is more deer now then ever before. If the herd was in check we would not see the diseases we are today and the insurance rates would reflect it also. I think a deer a year in great just shoot a doe. I think its an excuse when people say that the little bucks are all they see when I could almost shoot a doe every day out on state land arround here. As for hammer handle's comment about party hunting I think that we should get rid of it. You said "if a deer walks by thats wounded and you dont have a tag" then you dont shoot. If you are out grouse hunting and you see a wounded deer do you shoot it then? Also when you say "should you do deer drives with two people" in my opinion don't do deer drives just learn to hunt. Like I posted before it take a great hunter to go one on one with a deer in its home it takes a good shot to shoot one.

[mtheis]

I personally feel that the Metro Deer Zone is too liberal. We can presently shoot as many deer as we want (only one buck), and we can do this for three weeks in a row. I hunt up in Grant Township and have noticed ever since the season got extended our party is seeing less and less deer each season. Of course I understand this is exactly what the DNR wants, however I think it should be tempered a little by decreasing the harvest to two deer a hunter. I am probably in the minority but for this reason I am against the donate a deer program as well. We are shooting up our resources when the food shelves could be filled with other items that will help the poor.

[mnfishman]

I believe the only way you are going to get more mature bucks in this state is to stop selling buck tags over the counter. Those should be lottery only. I can't believe any person in the country can come to MN and buy a buck tag and go shoot anything with horns.

Secondly I read on another forum that there should be three different licenses.

1. $30 All Season License good for one deer lottery buck or doe.

2. $60 All Season License good for one buck and one doe

3. $90 All Season License good for one buck and two does.

Of course if you want to shoot a buck you would need to apply for a permit in your zone.

The reason why this makes sense to me is I would love the opportunity to hunt all the seasons but I don't need 3 deer. If I drew a buck tag and a big 10 walked by me Oct 1st I would shoot and be done for the season.

[DeanoB]

Quote:

---

I am probably in the minority but for this reason I am against the donate a deer program as well. We are shooting up our resources when the food shelves could be filled with other items that will help the poor.

---

I certainly hope you are in the minority! Do you have any idea what it takes to operate a food shelf? Apparently not, too many people already share your belief, and there isn't much in these food shelves. How do I know? My company works very closely with Channel One here in Rochester, and my mom also works there part time, she distruibutes food to other food shelves in Minnesota, and secures donations from large companies. If I stop by to take ma out for lunch, there isn't a lot of food as far as protein such as meat goes. The donation program has been viewed as a blessing by the food shelves, as do most of the people who haven't had a roast, or nice cut of meat in a long time. Would you rather just have the meat get freezer burned, and throw it away in 2-3 years? This is why the program was founded, for hunters to be able to shoot the 5 deer they have licenses for in certain zones without wasting meat, and for the needy to be able to eat.

[Hammer Handle]

Deer drives are not hunting? Nothing more exciting than a successfull deer drive.

Just sitting in a "home" and shooting a deer at 200 yards away? I could say the same thing and say that is not hunting.

Both are part of deer hunting and it should stay that way.

[96trigger]

Well said Deano, the food shelf program is going to be utilized in the intensive harvest and management areas.

ONe person comes on here talking about the Doe to buck ratio being out of whack, the next says that there aren't enough deer. Now you guys might see what the DNR is up against. There are some areas that are heavily populated, and there are some areas where the population is sparce. Someone also mentioned that in their area, they wouldn't mind it if the DNR closed hunting for three years. If you own your own land, then take your own advice and don't hunt it for three years. The deer will see it as a refuge, and will come back. Not everybody should have to give up their right to hunt because your area in an area has a smaller deer population or because you want to shoot a trophy buck.

My area this year has dropped from intensive to management, am I mad about it, absolutely not. If the DNR thinks that the deer numbers are down, or that we had an exceptional harvest, then so be it. I thought that they were nuts at first but am now hearing that the amoung of deer registered is down. Maybe the DNR does know a little bit about what they are doing.

Too many people hunt their 100 acres and don't see deer and take this as a sign that the deer population is bad. What are the other factors playing into that equation? Too many standing corn fields? No food sources near by? Change in food source? Weather patterns? Are you doing something different? Is there 100 acres of land in the vicinity that nobody hunts? We need to look at the big picture, as I'm sure the DNR does. They are not managing for your 100 acres, they are trying to manage for a whole state with 1,000s of acres. Your supposed to manage your 100.

As for state land, they are doing their best. The last few years I have seen zone 344, (Whitewater state park) change in zoning because the deer pop has been closely monitored. Am I ticked that now I can only shoot one deer with a bow there? Not in the slightest. It would be nice if I could take a buck and a doe, but I can't, so I just wait for the chance at a nice buck, if it happens, great, if not, so be it. I know that the deer population in the area is very high, I also know that the hunting pressure from 3A and 3B is also very high and the DNR doesn't want to deplete the resources. So, Bravo to them, I stand by what they are doing. Some of us are seeing plenty of deer. Every year it seems that we see more and more big bucks on this forum. If the DNR changed the seasons or regs, we wouldn't see a change over night. They are doing the right thing, some of us are seeing a change for the better, the pics don't lie.

[chucker34]

I haven't read all the posts but am a big believer in what the DNR is doing, managing for numbers and opprotunities versus big bucks. I am a meat hunter. In the three years I've hunted now, I've taken four does with my bow and all experienced were awesome. That may not make me the great mighty hunter to get so excited over a doe in some eyes'. But I want an opportunity at a deer, not necessarily a big buck.

And personally, I think we shuold be more concerned over numbers right now when you look at how much of the state is lottery. I was all teed off at the beginning of the year because I couldn't take 2 or 3 deer with my all season license as in year's past. The numbers seemed great the past few years. I was seeing a lot of deer. But all of a sudden that changed this year. On our property, I went from seeing a couple of dozen different deer to half a dozen regulars and some transients during deer season. I was getting the same deer over and over on trail cams. So I admit I was wrong and the DNR was looking ahead.

Still plenty of guys are out there buying tags for their wives or kids to hunt. And that concerns me. Because I'd like to be able to take a deer next year, any adult deer. And that may not happen if the number of people circumventing the system keep depleting a stressed out population in many areas. I truly believe - as lcornice mentioned - we may be going to buck only next year if that happens. And then not only does it suck for me but for the big trophy hunters out there who are going to see every and any buck blasted out of the woods.