Camp Ripley deer hunt results-stories from 1st season?

[SmellEsox]

Theres 2 packs in camp. Total of 12-16 wolves.

[B. Amish]

Once upon a time I read about the early hunts at Camp Ripley. It was figured out that with a low hunter density hunt the hunters don't have much of a chance. Cram the hunters in and the overall success rate goes way up.

I would agree the number of harvested deer goes up, but can't imagine percent of success does. So, to keep population in balance they are forced to cram a small town of bowhunters out there at once. Almost an organized unorganized deer drive.

My point is that many people seek out this hunt because it's known that the place holds huge bucks. That's what attracts a fair number of the hunters. But, 1-2,000 hunters walking around at daybreak. Setting up metal stands. Getting light out and you can see 2 guys from your spot. Many folks changing spots throughout the day. The only way to harvest a mature buck in there is happenstance. Many more bucks die of old age in there than by arrow.

And the wolves have been there for at least 15 years.

[Jameson]

...I would agree the number of harvested deer goes up, but can't imagine percent of success does....

That is the crazy unexpected thing, success rate does go up.....to a point. Once the hunter density gets to be too high then there will be a decline, but at a certain medium-high hunter density the success rate is higher than at a very low hunter density rate. The organized unorganized deer drive saying is fairly accurate.

[laker1]

Would be interesting if somebody knows if they seen much winter mortality there? 2012-2013 I heard a fair amount of deer died. Two long springs in a row. It is bad toward spring because there metabolism starts kicking in requiring more food.

I know past years these warm days,hunting would really slow down after a few hours in the morning.

[SmellEsox]

All I ever hear is that the only reason fewer deer are being shot is because fewer permits are being given out. Nothing in any DNR model says numbers are down. At least here in central MN.

[Wanderer]

Deer leave sign. There was little sign of 2014 activity in Ripley.

Unless the whole herd shifted to another place for the year, the numbers are off.

Plenty of long standing trails with no leaves turned over on them, 1 small fresh rub, no fresh scrapes aside from the one a 4 pointer was tending, lone does. It all tells a story if you observe it.

[smsmith]

All I ever hear is that the only reason fewer deer are being shot is because fewer permits are being given out. Nothing in any DNR model says numbers are down. At least here in central MN.

Lazy hunters...that's gonna be the DNR spin coming out of Ripley.

[sticknstring]

Lazy hunters...that's gonna be the DNR spin coming out of Ripley.

They used that one last year. It'll probably be the tested and true too warm & windy excuse again. Maybe winter severity & wolves will get a nod as well. The lazy hunter one was creative though - got to admit it!

[smsmith]

They used that one last year. It'll probably be the tested and true too warm & windy excuse again. Maybe winter severity & wolves will get a nod as well. The lazy hunter one was creative though - got to admit it!

I've already heard second hand reports from guys who were there and who talked to Beau that it will be used again this year...at least as one of the reasons. I have heard from one Camp official that they think winter may have been worse than they thought.

There are likely a few reasons why the Ripley hunt was way down this year. Just like it will be across the state. One of those reasons has been too liberal doe tag allotment....but I bet we won't see that stated by anyone from the DNR.

[laker1]

All I ever hear is that the only reason fewer deer are being shot is because fewer permits are being given out. Nothing in any DNR model says numbers are down. At least here in central MN.

Actually they(2013-2014) do show they are down,but past modeling estimates were way too high for what was actually out there in much of the state.

[Getanet]

I've already heard second hand reports from guys who were there and who talked to Beau that it will be used again this year...at least as one of the reasons. I have heard from one Camp official that they think winter may have been worse than they thought.

There are likely a few reasons why the Ripley hunt was way down this year. Just like it will be across the state. One of those reasons has been too liberal doe tag allotment....but I bet we won't see that stated by anyone from the DNR.

Ssmith, I wonder why you think it's so far fetched for the DNR to blame the weather for lower harvests? You hear that reasoning from hunters all the time. In fact, here is one of the Facebook posts from one of the admins on the MWA Facebook page after the first weekend, "That's a wrap, calling Ripley quites. 65 in the middle of Oct sets the deer down pretty good."

Approximately 70% of our state's deer harvest is opening weekend of the firearms season - and if we get bad weather that weekend it seems to be a legitimate reason for a lower harvest - not just an excuse.

One of the main things I remember about Opening Weekend last year was the high winds - at least in my area. Sitting in the stand felt like being on a ride at Valley Fair and the deer simply weren't moving unless pushed.

[smsmith]

Ssmith, I wonder why you think it's so far fetched for the DNR to blame the weather for lower harvests? You hear that reasoning from hunters all the time. In fact, here is one of the Facebook posts from one of the admins on the MWA Facebook page after the first weekend, "That's a wrap, calling Ripley quites. 65 in the middle of Oct sets the deer down pretty good."

Approximately 70% of our state's deer harvest is opening weekend of the firearms season - and if we get bad weather that weekend it seems to be a legitimate reason for a lower harvest - not just an excuse.

One of the main things I remember about Opening Weekend last year was the high winds - at least in my area. Sitting in the stand felt like being on a ride at Valley Fair and the deer simply weren't moving unless pushed.

When did I say weather doesn't have an impact on the harvest? What I believe I have said previously is that the impact stated by the DNR is (IMHO) exaggerated quite a bit. What weather events occurred this year during the Ripley hunts to drop the harvest as much as it dropped? 65 in mid October isn't that unusual of an occurrence....I'm sure it's happened previously...right?

[smsmith]

There are likely a few reasons why the Ripley hunt was way down this year. Just like it will be across the state. One of those reasons has been too liberal doe tag allotment....but I bet we won't see that stated by anyone from the DNR.

Note the bold^^^

"A few reasons"...I think most reasonable deer hunters recognize that the last two winters and spring of '13 took a toll on the deer herd in the northern 1/3-1/2 of the state. I think most reasonable deer hunters recognize that non-human predation is taking a toll on the herd in many areas.

I think most reasonable deer hunters also recognize that antlerless tag allocations have been far too liberal for far too long. I'd just like to hear that our DNR is reasonable and recognize this as well.

[Getanet]

I wasn't referring to this thread specifically. But generally I seem to recall you being very sarcastic as a reason the DNR might cite for a lower harvest.

As a justification for lower harvests over longer period of time I would agree it's not a sound reason, but describing any particular year it could be. Depends on the year.

[smsmith]

I wasn't referring to this thread specifically. But generally I seem to recall you being very sarcastic as a reason the DNR might cite for a lower harvest.

As a justification for lower harvests over longer period of time I would agree it's not a sound reason, but describing any particular year it could be. Depends on the year.

There's no doubt weather can play a role in harvest. It would take some serious talking to convince me that weather would impact more than a few percentage points on the harvest though...and the following year (assuming better weather) the harvest would likely be those few percentage points higher.

For the DNR to continue to use the same reasons (wind, rain, corn, hunter laziness) year after year after year to blame decreasing harvests...yes...I meet that type of B.S. with sarcasm.

[SmellEsox]

Actually mornings were excellent deer hunting weather this past weekend. Deer should have been moving pretty good. I think we had upper 30's low 40's in the morning. Afternoon was warm, but most of the harvest occurs first half of the day in Ripley I would bet. I don't think you can put too much blame on the weather this year.

[smsmith]

Anybody seen the official numbers for the weekend? I'm seeing 40 on Saturday and 25 on Sunday.

[hockeybc69]

I agree weather is always a factor....

But at what point does it become an excuse the DNR is using too many times? Nearly every year for years now after the hunt, the DNR blames the lower harvest on weather and crops... At some point shouldnt we be absolutely overrun with deer if we shoot, fewer and fewer and fewer for several years??

We shot almost 300,000 deer hardly 10 years ago... We are staring at shooting less than 150,000 this year.... If the simple reason our harvests are always lower is due only to weather and corn....

Maybe just maybe.... there are fewer deer every year???? Crazy thought isnt it? The DNR wont admit it.

[hockeybc69]

70 deer total for second season apparently... We need Beau to let us all know and give us the spin on why so low.

[smsmith]

hockey....I'm not going to be at all surprised if we come in a lot closer to 100K than 150K

[hockeybc69]

Whatever the number is, there is no explaining why weather and crops can cause harvest reductions nearly 10 years in a row without our population absolutely bursting at the seams at some point.

[smsmith]

Whatever the number is, there is no explaining why weather and crops can cause harvest reductions nearly 10 years in a row without our population absolutely bursting at the seams at some point.

Agree completely

[Jameson]

...I think most reasonable deer hunters recognize that the last two winters and spring of '13 took a toll on the deer herd in the northern 1/3-1/2 of the state.....

And I think most have forgotten how the rifle hunt of '12 had perfect weather and corn harvest conditions and is also a factor in our depleted deer herd. Probably not as much as our winters/springs, but the superb hunting conditions of 2012 should be factored in somehow, too. If subpar hunting conditions of wind and standing corn have some value, then super hunting conditions and harvested crops have some value, too.

[smsmith]

And I think most have forgotten how the rifle hunt of '12 had perfect weather and corn harvest conditions and is also a factor in our depleted deer herd. Probably not as much as our winters/springs, but the superb hunting conditions of 2012 should be factored in somehow, too. If subpar hunting conditions of wind and standing corn have some value, then super hunting conditions and harvested crops have some value, too.

That very well could be true. In order to find these things out though, we'd have to study them, do hunter surveys, actually count the deer (where appropriate) more than once a decade, actually use some science to manage our deer herd....that kinda stuff...

[Black Bear]

"Whatever the number is, there is no explaining why weather and crops can cause harvest reductions nearly 10 years in a row without our population absolutely bursting at the seams at some point."

Absolutely SPOT ON! Great point hockeybc69

I hunted Ripley the first hunt......the 207 pounder actually walked by me first....I let him go as I hunt the metro extensively. The Ripley deer population is WAAAAAY down. Just a fact and the word is out now. Getting drawn for Ripley next year will not be difficult. I hope the population comes back.

[smsmith]

Final tally for Ripley was 145. Totals for the last decade have been 400-500. How can the harvest drop 70%(ish) in a year?

[hockeybc69]

Wind, rain, corn and lazy hunters. Pretty simple.

[Wanderer]

Less deer/less hunters.

I've mentioned the ATK property in Nowthen as being low on numbers also. Yes, it's been intensive harvest around it for years but the population continued to support the harvest. Same story with the U of M's Cedar Creek area near Isanti. Less deer than in the past. We've had BAD winters in the area. We didn't just start shooting a ton more deer in the past two years.

In the past weeks that I've been in western MN I've been told and notice the population is doing fine. Yes, 1 deer limit, antlerless by lottery. Could it be simply because of the limits the deer are holding their own?

Coincidentally the landowners out there mentioned they didn't have nearly the amount of snow we had in east central MN and much of greater MN for that matter.

[monstermoose78]

+1 Wanderer

[Farmsfulltime]

The last several winters have had a large effect on the deer numbers, Don't know how the DNR could be responsible for that also . Audit mother nature