Camp Ripley 2nd weekend

[laker1]

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.

[eyeguy 54]

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

[DaveT]

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.

[SmellEsox]

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

[SmellEsox]

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.

[sticknstring]

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.

[jgrimmz]

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

[NWKR]

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

[ANYFISH2]

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.

[sticknstring]

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

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.

[jgrimmz]

I stand corrected! And yes, I do apply second weekend exclusively so that is the hunt I was referring to.

[sticknstring]

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.

[jgrimmz]

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

[leechlake]

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

[SmellEsox]

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.

[NELS-BELLS]

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

[sticknstring]

28 bucks over 200# shot in 2010. 3 this year. Ouch.

[SmellEsox]

28 bucks over 200# shot in 2010. 3 this year. Ouch.

Yeah, and barely over 200 lately.

[laker1]

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.