Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Camp Ripley 2nd weekend


ANYFISH2

Recommended Posts

Spring of 2013 just east of Camp Ripley there was some fawn Mortality. I thought somebody who works in Camp mentioned earlier about lot of dead fawns in camp in 2013?

Get north of Brainerd about 30 miles,I think fawn mortality was moderate both the last two springs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ANYFISH2

    14

  • maros91

    11

  • Wanderer

    11

  • Cheetah

    9

  • 'we have more fun' FishingMN Builders

I was there in 1995 and watched as the 256 pounder was weighed. What a beast of a deer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this will be the first year of below long term average harvest Levels since 2003. Doesn't seem like it has been mismanaged for a decade like some here suggest.

Did you hunt there in the 80's and 90's? Have you hunted there in the last ten years?

I have, this place is nothing like it used to be.

This hunt used to have more applicants than tags. This year (possibly other more recent years, IDK) the opposite is true, obviously these people aren't coming back for a reason. Maybe the reason is there aren't very many deer left in camp. The harvest and hunter reports would bear that out.

It's entirely possible with the contingent of brown/down hunters that the population has steadily declined for ten years while the harvest numbers have remained fairly stable. You can kill 400 deer from a pool of 10,000, 5,000, 1,000 or even less. Eventually, you end up where they are now. A lot of people have been complaining for a long time that the quality of this hunt has gone downhill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you hunt there in the 80's and 90's? Have you hunted there in the last ten years?

I have, this place is nothing like it used to be.

This hunt used to have more applicants than tags. This year (possibly other more recent years, IDK) the opposite is true, obviously these people aren't coming back for a reason. Maybe the reason is there aren't very many deer left in camp. The harvest and hunter reports would bear that out.

It's entirely possible with the contingent of brown/down hunters that the population has steadily declined for ten years while the harvest numbers have remained fairly stable. You can kill 400 deer from a pool of 10,000, 5,000, 1,000 or even less. Eventually, you end up where they are now. A lot of people have been complaining for a long time that the quality of this hunt has gone downhill.

Exactly. Well put. How long do you think you can have higher doe harvest than buck harvest before the population declines. Baby deer gotta come from somewhere. And add in the problem of underestimating the effects of a difficult winter or two and now we got a very low population.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archery hunt harvest in Ripley was 308 in 2013. At least according to DNR data online.

You're right, I was looking at the long-term average mentioned in the article. I changed it above. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am fairly new to Ripley, having only hunted the past two seasons there, but my group has been hunting it since the early 90's. I feel a lot of people posting are overlooking some key information here.

The main reason for the Ripley hunt is to thin the heard on base. Not to be a spectacular trophy hunt, but to serve a purpose in regards to the nuisance deer can cause the military..

The other point is that there are still more applicants than hunters. There were a lot of hunters who didn't get drawn this season that would have loved to go, like myself. The hunt is being managed (correctly or incorrectly I'm not going to argue) but they certainly keep an eye on it.

Sure, I've heard all the big buck stories and still get excited at the chance of seeing one. I know numbers are dismal, but it still is a great experience. I have never seen the amount of deer on a hunt without any prep or scouting like I have seen in Ripley. I'm glad to hear so many people won't be going again next year or in the upcoming years, it leaves a higher chance for me to get drawn again grin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am fairly new to Ripley, having only hunted the past two seasons there, but my group has been hunting it since the early 90's. I feel a lot of people posting are overlooking some key information here.

The main reason for the Ripley hunt is to thin the heard on base. Not to be a spectacular trophy hunt, but to serve a purpose in regards to the nuisance deer can cause the military..

The other point is that there are still more applicants than hunters. There were a lot of hunters who didn't get drawn this season that would have loved to go, like myself. The hunt is being managed (correctly or incorrectly I'm not going to argue) but they certainly keep an eye on it.

Sure, I've heard all the big buck stories and still get excited at the chance of seeing one. I know numbers are dismal, but it still is a great experience. I have never seen the amount of deer on a hunt without any prep or scouting like I have seen in Ripley. I'm glad to hear so many people won't be going again next year or in the upcoming years, it leaves a higher chance for me to get drawn again grin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also the current Colonial is on record asking the DNR wildlife manage where all his deer are! Camp has recieved numerous awards for thier wildlife work and how well the training and wildlife coexist. This could be looked down on in their eye. Make no mistake, Camp Ripley loves having plenty deer there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other point is that there are still more applicants than hunters. There were a lot of hunters who didn't get drawn this season that would have loved to go, like myself. The hunt is being managed (correctly or incorrectly I'm not going to argue) but they certainly keep an eye on it.

I'm glad to hear so many people won't be going again next year or in the upcoming years, it leaves a higher chance for me to get drawn again grin

The 1st hunt was undersubscribed. Only 1800 applied for an available 2000 permits. Traditionally, the first hunt which takes place during the week is much easier to get drawn for. Thinking both hunts will be undersubscribed next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our group does as well. Just wanted to point out that if you're able to get some time off during the week, you have a much higher chance of getting drawn for the first hunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might have to go that route for next year. Even though everybody did pretty poorly, sure missed being there this year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the table it looks like hunter success % has averaged 9% and starting in 2004 it was double digits (11-12%) for 7 years. Back in the first 15 years there were a bunch of 6-7% success and mostly there were about 5000 hunters.

At least from the table through 2011 not much has changed percentage wise. Not saying 2012-this year aren't horrible but

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the table it looks like hunter success % has averaged 9% and starting in 2004 it was double digits (11-12%) for 7 years. Back in the first 15 years there were a bunch of 6-7% success and mostly there were about 5000 hunters.

At least from the table through 2011 not much has changed percentage wise. Not saying 2012-this year aren't horrible but

Success rates increased dramatically when a bonus permit was allowed. Note that at that time, doe harvest began to exceed buck harvest almost annually. Hunters could shoot a doe and still hunt for that big buck. Note also that buck harvest and the number of big bucks has decreased significantly as the population has declined in recent years. Remember all those 220, 230, 240 pound and bigger bucks that used to be shot? No more. I think it is because there are fewer bucks making it to older ages and fewer bucks produced overall because of fewer does. JMVHO. Take it for what it's worth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally the first hunt fell on Thur and Fri of MEA week, so kids and some teachers took advantage of that. I know I did. This year they changed the date to Wed and Thurs, so we applied for the weekend hunt instead. I wonder if that is part of the reason that fewer people applied for the first hunt this year.

Nels

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the table it looks like hunter success % has averaged 9% and starting in 2004 it was double digits (11-12%) for 7 years. Back in the first 15 years there were a bunch of 6-7% success and mostly there were about 5000 hunters.

At least from the table through 2011 not much has changed percentage wise. Not saying 2012-this year aren't horrible but

There was bow hunting in Camp way back in the 50's. The year 1957 the bucks average dressed weight were 172 pounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • Jetsky
      I'm catching them on bobbers and leeches.  Try fishing smaller side bays on the edge of some rocks but not in the rocks.  Fish in about 6 - 10 feet of water.  The bite starts about 7:30 pm till 9:00 pm.  I also noticed a few may flys hatching in the areas I'm getting success.  I think they're coming into the bays in the evening to feed on the mayflies.
    • SkunkedAgain
      Generally I agree with your assessment Gimruis. Nobody likes a nanny state, but the harsh reality is that without rules and regulations far too many people take advantage of limited natural resources. There are those that will never follow the rules regardless, as well as those that don't recognize that as more people catch more fish, we all need to keep less.   I've eaten a few SM in my life, and they taste just as good as a walleye or northern. However, I would bet that 80% or closer to 90% of all people catching SM practice catch-and-release. Therefore I am not sure what a slot is going to do in this specific situation. Maybe the DNR has some good theories but I doubt the main culprit is the number of large SM being kept for food. I assume that it is a contributing factor but not the main one.
    • gimruis
      Honestly the only way you are going to catch more muskies is to put more time in targeting them.  If they aren't willing to bite, you aren't going to catch any.  Its not like walleye or bass or panfishing where if a fish is in a neutral mood you can still maybe get one to bite.  The bite window is shorter and briefer with muskies and there isn't nearly as many of them either.  You could fish for a week straight without a mere sign of one and then when a bite window opens you might catch several quickly.   I would focus on weedy areas with good cabbage.  Target periods of higher potential like sunrise, sunset, cloudy/rainy days, and at night time if you are able to.  I wouldn't use really big lures yet either.  Downsize a little until late summer and then you can beef it up with bigger lures.
    • gimruis
      If this theory is accurate, then we've created our own problem here by keeping too many sizable ones and not enough smaller ones.  Its no different than the problem we've created with northern pike populations in many lakes that are full of stunted, smaller aggressive ones and lacking sizable ones.   Most fish this far north take a significant amount of time to reach larger size.  Removing these larger fish takes time to replace.  For many years, the regulations in Mille Lacs for smallmouth was only 1 fish over 21 inches.  Now, you can only keep fish under 17 inches.  I believe the regulations in this lake is what has made it what it is today.  Relying on anglers to do the right thing to overall better the status of a fishery rarely works.  We tend to rape and pillage for too long until the problem can't be fixed anymore.
    • MikeG3Boat
      Had another tough fishing weekend.  No walleyes for me.  I don't know what I am doing wrong, I am marking fish around the reefs in the mid 20 ft of water, but nothing is biting.   Where are some of these bobber spots people are talking about?  Any help would be appreciated, I just can't seem to get this figured out.  I am over on the west end of big bay.  I willing to drive a ways if it will be worth my time.  
    • smurfy
    • smurfy
    • Jetsky
      LOL Skunked, I believe you're probably right.   No Muskies but they caught their limit of eaters and one of them caught a 26 incher.  So a successful trip for them.
    • knoppers
      when I was guiding for Dan Gapen on the river, we kept the smaller smallmouth for shore lunch. they taste like any other fish.
    • leech~~
      Church is tomorrow, you may want to go get that mind cleaned out!🤭
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.