Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[laker1]

I think Wisconsin WSI index starts when they have 18 inches of snow on the ground than you start adding on also when it reaches 0 degrees F.

Minnesota WSI starts at 15 inches snow depth, than 0 degrees F. can be added,and for years Minnesota did say a WSI deer are stressed at 100. A WSI reading does not start until you get the 15 inches of snow. Maybe the 180 number is when very substantial losses occur?

Either way the Indexes are a little different.

[smsmith]

  laker1 said:

I think Wisconsin WSI index starts when they have 18 inches of snow on the ground than you start adding on also when it reaches 0 degrees F.

Minnesota WSI starts at 15 inches snow depth, than 0 degrees F. can be added,and for years Minnesota did say a WSI deer are stressed at 100. A WSI reading does not start until you get the 15 inches of snow. Maybe the 180 number is when very substantial losses occur?

Either way the Indexes are a little different.

Last winter the MN WSI changed. It went from considering 120 days as being "very severe" to 180 days being "severe".

Yes, the two indexes are different...by 3" of snow

[LandDr]

Thermal cover and food sources...controllable

Pulling the trigger...controllable

Winter weather...uncontrollable

DNR...uncontrollable

[docc8]

As I posted previously I firmly believe that the last 2 winters are what caused a severe decline of our deer herd in northern Minnesota. No matter what the DNR does that is out of our control. I believe bucks only is a first step. We are 0-7 with 0 bucks seen. I am not sure how much the wolves have played into the picture but they are definitely thick in our area. As stated before no does taken in 10 years and not taking bucks unless they are an 8 or better for 5-10 years and corresponding hunters in our area doing the same (probably for a 5 mile radius). I sure am eating crow as I passed on several 8 pointers and a small 10 the last 2 years.

[laker1]

Also the WSI is a index,and should be used as a indicator and maybe best case scenario?

As mentioned above the WSI starts at 15 inches of snow. But if you have 40 inches of snow you get no more points on the WSI than if you had 15 inches.

The same if it is 0 degrees or a -40 degrees F. I think you got 1 point over 15 inches of snow and 1 point temp. 0 degrees or colder per day.

I believe I am right on what I said,unless they changed the format in recent years?

[smsmith]

  laker1 said:

Also the WSI is a index,and should be used as a indicator and maybe best case scenario?

As mentioned above the WSI starts at 15 inches of snow. But if you have 40 inches of snow you get no more points on the WSI than if you had 15 inches.

The same if it is 0 degrees or a -40 degrees F. I think you got 1 point over 15 inches of snow and 1 point temp. 0 degrees or colder per day.

I believe I am right on what I said,unless they changed the format in recent years?

I believe you are correct. On a day with at least 15" of snow and a temp of 0 or lower, it would count for "2" on the WSI

[smsmith]

  LandDr said:

Thermal cover and food sources...controllable

Pulling the trigger...controllable

Winter weather...uncontrollable

DNR...uncontrollable

I completely agree on 1, 2, and 3. I only partially agree on 4. The DNR is a government agency, and as such are responsible to those they serve. They can't just make things up as they go and never get called on the carpet. We certainly wouldn't allow the rest of our government to go unchecked without voicing our concerns...correct? A casual perusal of "silly town" makes that abundantly clear to me...there seems to be no aversion on many folks' part to call for accountability on all levels of government...except the DNR anyway.

[J_D]

They don't call it deer killing for a reason, enjoy the season. I have spent a lot of time in the woods this fall/winter and that's what its about, not complaining about a government agency! Seems your passing the blame!

[smsmith]

  J_D said:

They don't call it deer killing for a reason, enjoy the season. I have spent a lot of time in the woods this fall/winter and that's what its about, not complaining about a government agency! Seems your passing the blame!

You're entitled to your opinion. I've spent quite a bit of time in the woods this fall as well. I live in the woods, so I have a pretty good fix on what's going on around me. Not sure how I'm passing the blame...but whatever. I haven't participated in the slaughter here, I'm just feeling the effects of it.

[PurpleFloyd]

  laker1 said:

Yes,that is what many people don't realize,much of Minnesota is north of the northern border of Wisconsin.

Also know that in Wisconsin along lake Superior it is Bucks only this year, a few years ago I know it was more than 6 deer you could shoot at least,

Yep. I used to live in Wisconsin right on Superior and still have a bit of woods there that we co own with relatives. Back in the 80's and 90's you could basically take 6 deer a year by buying tags for all the seasons plus bonus tags. That went on for a long time but IMHO the population headed south when the wolf population established itself. They also planted elk in 1995 and started with 25 but the population has only grown to a bit over 150 in the 2 decades they have been there which IMO is being limited by wolf predation as well.

When we get up there we were used to seeing a pretty large herd that was always sustaining itself even with the pressure the hunters put on the population with all the extra tags but the wolves have knocked the herd back in recent years and we see fewer deer the last 2 years than we ever have. I know the reduction is not from more hunters because this area is pretty redneck and the land is private and locked up so there has been no influx of hunters to account for the reduction. (And a certain MNDNR employee has no impact on this area either)

[PurpleFloyd]

  J_D said:

They don't call it deer killing for a reason, enjoy the season. I have spent a lot of time in the woods this fall/winter and that's what its about, not complaining about a government agency!

Amen and a +1

[smsmith]

Its quite aways from the big lake to Clam Lake isn't it P.F.?

[Bureaucrat]

Anyone catching the chatter in the Red Lake forum about the walleye limit reduction to 3 from 4? Everyone is tripping over themselves in there to share their happiness or contentment with the decision, and there is almost no concern or outrage over the reduction.

It's very interesting to me that the conversation and sides are so different in the deer discussion. It seems most everyone agrees that the deer populations are down. Why is still up for grabs, but everyone is almost united in the decision to stabilize or grow the walleye herd and indifferent or outright against growing or being concerned about the deer herd.

I tried baiting PF over there, and he didn't bite. Bravo sir.

[smsmith]

MN is a walleye state...not a deer state

[PurpleFloyd]

  smsmith said:

Its quite aways from the big lake to Clam Lake isn't it P.F.?

No.

77-13

45 minutes.

[PurpleFloyd]

  Bureaucrat said:

Anyone catching the chatter in the Red Lake forum about the walleye limit reduction to 3 from 4? Everyone is tripping over themselves in there to share their happiness or contentment with the decision, and there is almost no concern or outrage over the reduction.

[hockeybc69]

Need smaller bucks to be in the woods to fill the "livewell".

MDDI isnt about bigger bucks. Its about deer.

[delcecchi]

  Bureaucrat said:

Anyone catching the chatter in the Red Lake forum about the walleye limit reduction to 3 from 4? Everyone is tripping over themselves in there to share their happiness or contentment with the decision, and there is almost no concern or outrage over the reduction.

It's very interesting to me that the conversation and sides are so different in the deer discussion. It seems most everyone agrees that the deer populations are down. Why is still up for grabs, but everyone is almost united in the decision to stabilize or grow the walleye herd and indifferent or outright against growing or being concerned about the deer herd.

I tried baiting PF over there, and he didn't bite. Bravo sir.

Some reasons...

People don't get killed or injured by colliding with a walleye.

(what is the value of a human life?)

Walleye don't adversely affect an economic asset by eating all the young trees that would otherwise grow into big trees.

Walleye don't affect crop yields of the farmers.

Walleye can't get Chronic Wasting Disease or any other disease possibly fatal to humans.

Walleye don't eat folks shrubs and apple trees. There are some rabbits around that are living on borrowed time though.

That's about what I can come up with on short notice.

[Bureaucrat]

Just thought it was interesting. I once knew an old man that talked about how he wanted to shoot bald eagles (he never got one, nor could he) because he was trying to save the ducks and loons on his lake.

Then there was the beavers that built the dam that made the lake in the woods possible. He wanted to kill them. I enjoyed fishing the lake.

People's view of natural resources is always an interesting discussion to say the least.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

Some reasons...

People don't get killed or injured by colliding with a walleye.

(what is the value of a human life?)

Then we must eradicate all deer. One life lost is too many.

Walleye don't adversely affect an economic asset by eating all the young trees that would otherwise grow into big trees.

I am pretty sure deer have been on the landscape for eons, and I see mature trees all over MN.

Walleye don't affect crop yields of the farmers.

Do racoons, bears, geese, cranes, etc affect crop yields? If so, we might want to address those critters a bit more.

Walleye can't get Chronic Wasting Disease or any other disease possibly fatal to humans.

Possibly fatal to humans? Speculation?

Walleye don't eat folks shrubs and apple trees. There are some rabbits around that are living on borrowed time though.

I have shrubs and apple trees. We spray targeted plants with a mix of irish spring soap and water, and my apple trees are all caged and have never had one problem with deer bothering them.

[Bureaucrat]

Ducks and geese eating the winter wheat in the dakotas, pheasants spreading russian olive seed in MN. I suppose one could argue for the eradication of just about anything if you tried hard enough.

Save the Red Lake Crappie!

[BuckSutherland]

  J_D said:

They don't call it deer killing for a reason, enjoy the season. I have spent a lot of time in the woods this fall/winter and that's what its about, not complaining about a government agency! Seems your passing the blame!

Ugh

This post is so good it gets two thumbs up from me.

When will some of you understand that ITS NOT ALL ABOUT THE HUNTING SEASON. That some of us just like more deer in general.

[Bureaucrat]

I know walleye guides in Montana that kill every single northern they can legally keep because they believe they hurt the walleye population. Guess what, you're taking northern home too.

I cringed as I watched them butcher countless 36+" northerns over the years. On an "unrelated" note, I never did catch my 46" northern I had hoped for.

[BuckSutherland]

  Eric Wettschreck said:

Yes, the herd size is small in a big chunk of the state. Less antlerless tags issued. What more is the DNR supposed to do?

I wish I could come live in magic fairy tale land with you. There have been several attempts on here to explain how this decline has been happening for several years, and all the money we urinate away on employing the DNR and they are unable to ever get out in front of a problem. Walleye collapse, then they finally do something to a lake, deer are gone, then they go bucks only. Moose are gone. Lets close the season. Talk about leading from behind.

What more could they do??

1. More zones could have been bucks only. 172,197,179,171,173,184 AT LEAST should have been bucks only. I was in all of those zones, and the snow was DEEP and the cold was terrible.

2. Predator control

3. Shorter season

Good grief. You make it sound like they have no control over the situation. How many more deer would be alive today if the wolf numbers were actually around 1,000 or if they would have laid off handing out all the extra permits. Obviously people like yourself gobble up whatever drivel they put out. If they would have said all these extra tags are too much so we are done with them people would have trusted them. The biologist are the ones that told people to go out and shoot them and everything would be ok. And here we are today with number way down and going into what looks like another hard winter.

[laker1]

Maybe this site getting a little off topic and more irrational?

[SmellEsox]

  laker1 said:

The only thing I will offer is what the weather people mention. The average or mean may have been colder. We didn't have the extreme cold temperatures. The nights were averaging times above or at normal,the problem was day time temperatures were much colder than normal.

Disagree with you on the lows. We had more days below 0 than we've had in 100 years and more days -20 or colder than we've had in 100 years. We didn't have the -40 stuff, but lows were very cold. Agree that it had an impact here in Little Falls area.

[B. Amish]

the really important factor about the last two winters is that it was still winter when it should've been spring. that's what really crushed the deer.

[laker1]

I looked it up and you were right or close to it.

Brainerd had 18 days below -20 degrees F. last winter. Coldest -25 degrees F.

Winter of 95-96 also had 18 days and winter of 96-97 we had 20 days below -20 degrees. Those winters had more extreme cold and lots of snow.

You were right on lot of cold tho and that brings up my point that it was a hard winter on the deer. I know within a small area I hunt they found over 6 dead fawns died because of the severity and know others who found dead deer not eaten on east of Mille lacs lake.

[laker1]

  B. Amish said:

the really important factor about the last two winters is that it was still winter when it should've been spring. that's what really crushed the deer.

Correct,deer get hit hard when March comes around and their metabolism starts kicking up,thus needing more food which wasn't there and also the work to get thru the snow.

[leechlake]

hate to be a deer in NY right now, 5 feet of snow? Good luck to the hunters next year.