Who should make the rules?

[DaveT]

If 80 percent of the deer hunters in MN hunt deer for 2 or 3 days a year, and those same 80 percent don't know the difference between a scrape and a pothole, while the other 20 percent hunt 20, 30 or more days a year, devoting a ton of time, money and energy to it, who should have the loudest voice when it comes to making the rules?

I already know who currently has the loudest voice (BigDave) I'm asking who cares the most about the resource and who/what is the future constituency? Is the DNR risking losing it all because it wants to satisfy everybody? Are they in danger of selling fewer and fewer licenses every year as guys like me who want better hunting decide to find it elsewhere?

I know I am currently in the minority, but my ranks are growing, while the weekend warriors are dropping off due to increased costs and lack of good hunting ground.

There are plenty of businesses lately who have failed because they didn't plan for the future, what is our DNR planning for?

[mrklean]

I could really care less if those weekend hunters drop out, no matter what license cost gear etc is gonna get more expensive each year. Its gonna take some huge jumps in prices to get me to stop hunting i mean a res license for way over $200 is maybe gonna get me to stop but probably not. The DNR should do whats best for the herd, not just what people think and want. Its all hard to say was putting out record doe tags and early season anterless smart??? I think they should do more research into populations then into what people say. Everyone wants big deer and everyone wants to shoot a deer without anything being taken away from them. You have to give to get. But hey what do i know, im just a salesman

[kr8r.tom]

having been in fisheries in the private sector for a few years, i've had opportunities to work with the d.n.r from wisconsin, michigan, new york and minnesota. the outstate d.n.r's all told us they like to do with their resources what the taxpayer/sportsman wanted and did what they could to make it happen, if it was feasable and not detramental to the resource. in minnesota when ideas are suggested our d.n.r seems to give every reason they can as to why the suggestion won't work, instead of trying to find a solution. they seem to fight change, i get the same feeling from the majority of people on here, maybe its a minnesota thing,they don't like change and aren't willing to try. it's like the little kid who hates green beans even though he's never tasted them.

[Black_Bay]

Q: Who should make the rules?

A: Simple...ME!

(I'm sure that is the same answer many would give)

[mnguy152]

i think there is too many yes people in the dnr thats why alot of this gets done. like the 3 pheasant rule/ longer season just to benifit some sentor that was mad that he was done for the day with 2. But they will always now day look out for the smallest group and support them instead of the majority.just my 2cents

[Black_Bay]

i think there is too many yes people in the dnr thats why alot of this gets done.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

[harvey lee]

For me, The DNR is doing a very good job. I spend many hours in the outdoors hunting and fish even more. I personally am very happy with the populations we have here in Minnesota.

One will never be able to satisfy all. Our deer hunting and turkey hunting may be the best it the last ten years in the history of this state Minneosta.

The fishing for me has been nothing short of great. I personally have caught many trophy class fish in the past two years.

I'm not trying to state that it could not be better in some areas but, overall, I do believe that the wildlife and our fisheries are in pretty good shape.

When one considers the amount of baby boomers retiring and using the outdoors and our resources as much as they are, our wildlike and fisheries seem to be in darn good shape. One has to remember that there is more pressure now than ever before.

[Wanderer]

If 80 percent of the deer hunters in MN hunt deer for 2 or 3 days a year, and those same 80 percent don't know the difference between a scrape and a pothole, while the other 20 percent hunt 20, 30 or more days a year, devoting a ton of time, money and energy to it, who should have the loudest voice when it comes to making the rules?

Hmm... Sounds like an Election.

I would say the people making the rules should be the ones out in the field every day, seeing the wildlife and habitat, surveying hunters and fishers, doing scientific research, checking the findings against documented history, and consulting with others who go through the same trials in other parts of the country.

I wonder who that could be? Feel free to insert DNR here.

I think we need to face the fact that ecology is an ever changing thing that requires different responses to those changing conditions. Things will always vary, we need to vary with them.

I Just looked at yet another couple pages of big buck photos in the Outdoor News. If I would have connected with the one I was after this year, it would have been just another photo. I think technology is helping a lot of people out these days. (i.e. information sharing, studies, scouting and hunting tools, land management). It's our evolution.

Should we take away some of technology that has helped some tag out on big bucks regularly? Should we move to a "one over 150 inches per 5 year limit" similar to fishing daily limits?

More inches or more deer? With as many people who hunt as we have in this state who only hunt for deer and only do it 4 days a year, what can we really expect?

These are some things I think about when reading these debates.

[mrklean]

I want to see one group or person make half a million people happy. The day that happens it starts raining gold and $100 bills

[Bear55]

If 80 percent of the deer hunters in MN hunt deer for 2 or 3 days a year, and those same 80 percent don't know the difference between a scrape and a pothole, while the other 20 percent hunt 20, 30 or more days a year, devoting a ton of time, money and energy to it, who should have the loudest voice when it comes to making the rules?

Dave T as usual you are stirring the pot and making alot of sense. Keep doing what you do! I think we need more people like you in our DNR, people with ideas who aren't affraid of change!

[Pickelfarmer]

DAVE T, I have to wonder if maybe your not a closet out of stater ??? I mean really. What needs to change in MN? I have success every year hunting in MN. yeah maybe its not the trophy that YOU expect but I'm happy with the way the MN deer herd is managed. I think the better question to be asked rather than who makes the rules or how can we get better hunting in MN is how can we help to keep the healthy deer herd (that MN already has) and a populis deer herd? And I really disagree with those that say that a healthy deer herd is one with monster bucks and lots of them. If I remember right there has never been on record a Buck deer give birth to a fawn deer. PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong. Last year I just learned the difference between a pot hole and a scrape.. I had to throw that in LOL.

I think thats really the question your asking here. HOW CAN WE GET RID OF THE EVERY DAY DEER HUNTER AND TURN MN INTO A STATE THAT IS A TROPHY STATE? Its fine the way it is. I for one won't quit hunting here... And I will help make the rules anyway I can.

[sparcebag]

I fall down go boom got SCRAPE On my knee-- Pothole?on knee

[96trigger]

While I am not afraid of change, and definitely wouldn't mind seeing a few more of the small bucks get a little older. I don't think that we can rule out the vast majority of hunters just because they only hunt them for two days a year. Just because someone doesn't have the time or resources to hunt deer 30 days a year, doesn't mean they don't love to go out on opening of fiream just as much as those that put in a ton of time.

While I don't disagree with your statements, and you probably have heard me backing you up on a few occasions. I think that pitting one deer hunter against another for a difference of view will not help future hunting.

I think out best chance at seeing changes is to try and implement these changes for ourselves. Instead of lobbying the DNR, do what you do on here, and lobby other people. It scares me when a very vocal minority with special interests try and push regulations for the masses. On a scale of 1-10, I would rate my area a 7 for deer hunting. I think that there would be a lot people that would rate their areas in the 0-3 range. The DNR has a big task at hand trying to please everyone. If that vocal minority can somehow convert the majority, I think the DNR could make some more changes. I believe this is happening with the younger generations, but it will not happen over night.

[dspohn]

I fall down go boom got SCRAPE On my knee-- Pothole?on knee

i hope that was a joke.

[Bear55]

I think out best chance at seeing changes is to try and implement these changes for ourselves. Instead of lobbying the DNR, do what you do on here, and lobby other people. It scares me when a very vocal minority with special interests try and push regulations for the masses. On a scale of 1-10, I would rate my area a 7 for deer hunting. I think that there would be a lot people that would rate their areas in the 0-3 range. The DNR has a big task at hand trying to please everyone. If that vocal minority can somehow convert the majority, I think the DNR could make some more changes. I believe this is happening with the younger generations, but it will not happen over night.

That is the hard part, at least where I hunt. I had tried for years to talk our group and several nieghbors into letting the small buck walk without any luck. Sure a small group of our dedicated hunters let the small buck so be we only represent about 10% of the hunters in the area. Finally I gave up, I was tired of talking and they were tired of listening. The worst part is I think some guys would be up for it but they say it can't work on public land, nothing will ever work if you don't at least try.

[96trigger]

Sorry for your situation Bear, I guess in that case I would just make the best of it. Good luck.

[DaveT]

Pickelfarmer, I am not a closet out of stater, nor am I coming out of the closet, I'm not even anywhere near a closet. However, I do love to deer hunt out of state because I have so much more fun! I apologize for enjoying hunting so much that I try to do as much of it as I can. I'm so sorry that I can go to Kansas or Iowa and see 25 or more bucks in a week of hunting, where I don't have to fear for my life while I hunt the peak of the rut with my bow. Will you ever forgive me for passing up little bucks in MN and elsewhere, because I feel that I've shot enough of them and choose to wait for a big one?

The question I'm asking is what I already asked: Who should make the rules?

The majority or the minority?

Should a guy who deer hunts 2 or 3 days a year have as much say in the regulations as a guy who hunts 30?

Who spends more money and buys more tags?

Would the 1 weekend a year guy quit if he had to hunt November 25th instead of November 8th?

Would he quit if he couldn't tag a buck for his wife?

Should we care if he quits?

Make the hunting what it could be and raise the cost of nonresident tags to make up the difference, that's what every state with good hunting does.

Right now the DNR pretends to listen to the hunters and then does what's best for their pocketbook. Then they back it up by saying they surveyed us and this is what we want. Nobody from the DNR has ever asked me what I want.

[harvey lee]

I believe that all should have a voice and not a select few. We all hunt differently and that is everyones option. I choose to hunt in North Dakota on a private ranch as my chances at a larger buck are considerably better in my mind from the area I have to hunt at home.

Everyone looks at deer hunting for a different reason, some being for meat and others for a trophy class buck.

We all do the same thing for fishing.

The DNR usually has area mettings that sportsman and women can attend and voice their opinion on the subject above, The DNR tries to do what we all want which is almost impossible to do.

We also have to consider what the population of the herd is in each area and that does factor in on the seasons set.

I would hate to see it go to what other staes have done with the fee's for hunting. This method will turn it into a sport only for the wealthy. I use to go to Montana elk hunting but I don't anymore since the fee's have went as high as they have.

[Black_Bay]

For those of you that don't know it, when the DNR askes for input, it isn't a vote. They don't survey 1000 people and go with the idea that had the most votes. Meetings usually are poorly attended and they can also be stacked in favor of one view point. They try to go with what would please most of the people and what is best for the environment. That doesn't always happen but the DNR tries. They could just as easily do whatever they want with hunters and anglers being hosed.

[Bear55]

Sorry for your situation Bear, I guess in that case I would just make the best of it. Good luck.

That is what I am doing, sure it would be nice to see a few more mature deer but I'm happy just to be out there. The old school guys are set in the ways and they are hard to change, no big deal, the younger generations sometimes can be even more confusing. I've been waiting for them to get a little older and get a few more deer under their belt before I try and educate them a little. They only seem interested in the latest and greatest in technology and entertainment. Sure they come up and hunt when they get a free weekend, when I was their age there were very few weekends I wasn't out in the woods.

[Bear55]

Pickelfarmer, I am not a closet out of stater, nor am I coming out of the closet, I'm not even anywhere near a closet. However, I do love to deer hunt out of state because I have so much more fun! I apologize for enjoying hunting so much that I try to do as much of it as I can. I'm so sorry that I can go to Kansas or Iowa and see 25 or more bucks in a week of hunting, where I don't have to fear for my life while I hunt the peak of the rut with my bow. Will you ever forgive me for passing up little bucks in MN and elsewhere, because I feel that I've shot enough of them and choose to wait for a big one?

The question I'm asking is what I already asked: Who should make the rules?

The majority or the minority?

Should a guy who deer hunts 2 or 3 days a year have as much say in the regulations as a guy who hunts 30?

Who spends more money and buys more tags?

Would the 1 weekend a year guy quit if he had to hunt November 25th instead of November 8th?

Would he quit if he couldn't tag a buck for his wife?

Should we care if he quits?

Make the hunting what it could be and raise the cost of nonresident tags to make up the difference, that's what every state with good hunting does.

Right now the DNR pretends to listen to the hunters and then does what's best for their pocketbook. Then they back it up by saying they surveyed us and this is what we want. Nobody from the DNR has ever asked me what I want.

Not saying I agree or disagree but you make a good point. The DNR caters to everyone which seems fair, however they might want to re-think some of their priorities. Maybe they should think of us as clients. If you are a business you are going to favor your clients who buy 3 licenses and a few bonus tages every year over another client who might only buy one tag and barely get out to hunt because they are too hungover.

[mrklean]

Maybe we should have an election, vote for a change in the DNR, and i for one am here for the people we need that change Even if the election is over its still funny

[pinkfloyd4ever]

The DNR usually has area mettings that sportsman and women can attend and voice their opinion on the subject above, The DNR tries to do what we all want which is almost impossible to do.

Exactly.

I think for change at the DNR that has to go thru T-Paw, I think DNR commish is a governor appointee?

[propster]

Spot on Dave. Who are the passionate ones? And as for high out of state fees, it doesn't seem to bother all the guys I know that can't wait to have a chance - Iowa, Kansas, etc. Heck, it takes 3 years or more to get drawn in most Iowa non-res zones - they have plenty of applications. And I plunk that money down gladly because the hunting is that much better. Why can't we have that as a resident, where it wouldn't cost you an arm and a leg either? I'd be interested to see what the number of non-resident hunters coming to Minnesoata is compared to other states. I'll bet it pales in comparison, even though the license fee is a third the cost of the others or less. Of course, we answer our own question here - why would you come to Minnesota as a non-res other than for family or tradition. And don't get me wrong - there are big mature bucks here, but it takes half a million hunters to root a few of them out.

[BLACKJACK]

I Just looked at yet another couple pages of big buck photos in the Outdoor News.

Always my favorite argument when people whine about the lack of big bucks. They're out there, the photos in the ODN and bait shops prove it, go hunt one down, don't expect the DNR to provide one for you.

I think the DNR does a great job of protecting and maintaing the resources for the majority, its impossible to please everybody.

Back to Dave's original question, I think it should be one hunter, one vote, equal representation for all - thats what makes the USA great. Just because one hunter spends 40 days in the field each fall doesn't give them any more right or voice then some guy that spends 4 days in the field.

[BLACKJACK]

I think that pitting one deer hunter against another for a difference of view will not help future hunting.

[Bear55]

Originally Posted By: Wanderer

I Just looked at yet another couple pages of big buck photos in the Outdoor News.

Always my favorite argument when people whine about the lack of big bucks. They're out there, the photos in the ODN and bait shops prove it, go hunt one down, don't expect the DNR to provide one for you.

.

Oh look my favorite argument, the bucks are there go get them. Guess what, many of us try and accomplish that every year, but there are so few of these bucks I would need to quit my job and let my family go into bankruptcy to get one. That or get lucky, now I have gotten luck a few times in the past but I also put in a lot of hard work and time. In 18 years of hunting I have seen 2 mature bucks on stand and I was fortunate enough to get both of them.

I'm not asking the DNR to change the rules so there is a "big buck behind every tree" as many here think. First of all that is a weak argument and really not possible, just because there are more bucks around does not mean they are going to be any easier to kill. All I'm asking for is maybe, just maybe the chance that if I put in a ton of time and hard work I might get the opportunity to see a mature buck once every season or two.

[DaveT]

I think that complacency is the biggest threat to the future of hunting.

It scares me when people are so against change that they ignore facts and discount opposing views without giving it any thought.

[96trigger]

Please give the facts that we are ignoring?????

[DaveT]

Sorry Trigger, that wasn't directed at you, some of these guys are not willing to hear anything that contradicts what they believe is gospel.

They keep trying to tell me how good the hunting is here, and I don't agree. I've hunted in 5 other states in the last 8 years and I know what good hunting is. Our deer hunting is a joke compared to what other states have.

My frustration over this issue is getting the better of me.

I am going to leave it at that and get back to this issue next fall after I get back from Iowa, Kansas and hopefully Pike County, Illinois. (I don't have permission yet Props, but you can't go with)