Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[BRULEDRIFTER]

No different from the norm I grew up with (late 80's - late 90's). I quit hunting too for about 5 years in my late teens early 20's because of it too. Had I not befriended a few hunters in college I may have never got back into it.

It's in the DNR's best interest to have higher deer populations if they want to retain hunters and recruit new ones. Let's hope the suits running the show realize that.

[smsmith]

My kids are growing into the sport right now. They know no different. This is the norm they will get to know..

To them it is what it is. This is deer hunting.

Yup...exactly.

Get an entire generation of hunters used to this type of hunting and its what they'll expect. What sucks is that those of us who used to hunt in places with an actual deer herd who move here get pretty friggin' frustrated Its pretty sad to think that THIS is what many folks in MN think deer hunting is supposed to be like.

Oh well, I'll suck it up for however long I live in this deer desert and never look back when I get the chance to move on to a state with a DNR/F&G who actually value their deer herd.

[BuckSutherland]

It's in the DNR's best interest to have higher deer populations if they want to retain hunters and recruit new ones. Let's hope the suits running the show realize that.

Yes indeed!!

My area 172 had a decent population 2010-2012. It is pretty poor now. Fields that used to hold 20-30 deer on a drive by in July now have 3 or 4.

I think a lot of the areas should have made the sacrifice this year and been bucks only. We could have had one year with very few deer shot, increased doe numbers, and possibly a much better season next year. But instead, we went half way with lottery, letting kids and bow hunters wack away. Some of the hunters did ok this weekend and others did quite poor. Next season is already lining up to be quite poor as well.

[nofishfisherman]

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. Has any body heard about a dnr employee in deer management that was fired for taking bribes from insurance company's? Apparently he was keeping certain areas at intensive harvest etc to lower deer numbers for insurance companys...I don't know if true so not saying is true, the person I heard it from said his name etc and sure sounded like he knew what he was saying. Not sure when sounded like last year or even more recent....

After working for an auto insurance company for several years I can assure you that the odds of that happening are very low. I worked in the department that would have been the ones doing the bribing in a case like that as it was our jobs to set rates and manage claim losses. I won't get into all the nitty gritty details but there are a million reasons why it wouldn't make any sense to bribe a DNR official in an attempt to reduce claim losses due to deer accidents. There are plenty of legal ways insurance companies protect themselves from various risks whether they be deer, weather, fraud, bad drivers, etc.

Besides there being other alternatives the numbers just wouldn't make sense. I just don't see any one company insuring enough drivers in one small area that it would provide enough of a financial incentive to risk criminal charges and government intervention. They would be risking far more than they could ever gain.

[jay83196]

Glad to hear that! I hope it wouldn't happen, why I asked people incase was true and others heard it to confirm it.

[smsmith]

Could be wrong but I though it was also due to very dry conditions, and high fire danger.. I don't believe they would ever completly close a season due to "low " numbers

I don't see anything in here about dry conditions...just bad winters and over harvest of does http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/133044308.html

A quote from another source:

The five words that would bring any deer hunter to tears were spoken in 1971, “deer hunting season is closed”. Fierce winters and unregulated hunting depleted deer numbers severely. Thus the season was closed in an attempt to form regulations and restabilize the herd.

After a five year hiatus, 1976 was the year antlerless permits were introduced. A specific number of does and fawns were allowed to be hunted in each of the 120 permit areas. Biologists reviewed density charts, then adjusted the amount of permits given according to population levels wanted.

Sure seems to me like closing the season this year (or next) is a discussion worth having. If not a closure, a complete elimination of antlerless harvest in the northern half of the state would/should be discussed.

[jay83196]

500.000 hunters × $31.00 license = $15,500.00....thats not including any bonus tags bow or muzzle loading hunters.....NEVER EVER HAPPEN!

[Deet]

500.000 hunters × $31.00 license = $15,500.00....thats not including any bonus tags bow or muzzle loading hunters.....NEVER EVER HAPPEN!

Wow, getting fancy here!

Try again.

[leechlake]

$15.5 million btw.

The largest impact on not having a deer season is to the economy's of the towns where deer hunters hunt. Bars, cafes, restaurants, stores etc. At least for the traveling hunter which I'd guess is 1/3-1/2 of the 500,000. Let's say it's 200,000 hunters who each spend $100 or more most likely. Big number to local small towns.

The numbers aren't going to get better without having does to have fawns, better mortality by getting lucky with at least two mellow Winters in a row. I'd scratch bow hunters and muzzy guys to be able to take does as a start. I don't bow hunt as much as I used to but even in our cruddy area I'd wager I could shoot a doe or more every year with my bow if I wanted to.

[leech~~]

No different from the norm I grew up with (late 80's - late 90's). I quit hunting too for about 5 years in my late teens early 20's because of it too. Had I not befriended a few hunters in college I may have never got back into it.

You know you quit for part of High school and college cuse other things were more important like chasing girls and boozing!

[jay83196]

Fancy....wow!

Bottom line you guys can argue it all day it won't happen...anybody thinking they will close the firearms season is kidding themselves! It's a different world from the 70's and way too much money involved. Its already Bucks only or lottery (with veey few tags given) in a large part of the state, maybe go to statewide buck only but never closed. Majority of guys will still hunt no matter how bad hunting is we do it for the enjoyment to get away and spend time with buddies/families its not always about getting a deer (but that would be nice!).

[B. Amish]

easy winter and the population could basically double.

nasty winter and the population could shrink.

[hockeybc69]

I cant find it but I know I have seen that deer hunting is a 4 billion industry to the state... or it could have been hunting in general. Either way, deer hunting is the vast majority of whatever the number is.

Never happen. So we should focus on what we CAN do to ensure long term quality deer hunting.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

easy winter and the population could basically double.

So we are at about a million deer this year prehunt.... if we have an easy winter you are saying we go to about 2 million deer?

You might want to check the math on that prediction. I think you have a few holes you might want to patch up in the formula.

[Getanet]

I should clarify my point. I don't believe the DNR should close the season, but I think if this year's harvest comes in as low as it's trending, and if this winter is about as brutal as last year, I believe it is something the DNR will at least to put on the table for discussion...

They were predicting a harvest of about 120K this year. So far, we've only registered 67,000 for archery and firearms. In a typical year about 70% of the total harvest is opening weekend of the firearms season, so we have a long way to go to get there. By my calculations we'll be lucky to break 90K.

[B. Amish]

So we are at about a million deer this year prehunt.... if we have an easy winter you are saying we go to about 2 million deer?

You might want to check the math on that prediction. I think you have a few holes you might want to patch up in the formula.

million deer?

prehunt vs after hunt.

think some more.

[FshBloodRiverMud]

The area i am hunting this year once again; has tons of deer. No need to close the season there. It would be nice if it would finally go from a lottery zone to at least a hunters choice zone. SW MN. There's no way the bucks can breed all the does in that area. You see 10 does to every buck. It's crazy lopsided.

[Todd Caswell]

I wonder how many of the people complaining of low deer numbers took advantage of bonus and intensive harvest permits in the past?my guess would be nearly everyone..

I remember when deer numbers were too high and on a trip from Brainerd to Blackduck we counted 21 road kills, not sure that's were we want our numbers at either.

[Todd Caswell]

The area i am hunting this year once again; has tons of deer. No need to close the season there. It would be nice if it would finally go from a lottery zone to at least a hunters choice zone. SW MN. There's no way the bucks can breed all the does in that area. You see 10 does to every buck. It's crazy lopsided.

In those areas wouldn't it make sense to do what most states d and make it a Buck Lottery? Boy that would cause a stir with all the horn hunters.

[96trigger]

Quote:

The area i am hunting this year once again; has tons of deer. No need to close the season there. It would be nice if it would finally go from a lottery zone to at least a hunters choice zone. SW MN. There's no way the bucks can breed all the does in that area. You see 10 does to every buck. It's crazy lopsided.

The biggest problem I am having with deer management is that you will probably go from lottery to intensive harvest. I have always had a problem with intensive harvest. I think it drops the population too fast, then a bad winter or 2 and the population crashes. I know that the data doesn't support many people taking 5 deer, but once you can take 5 deer, your whole mindset of deer hunting changes. Just like a lot of people are finding out now with only getting one deer tag throughout most of the state. The experience is different when you have one tag and its "the tag" compared to having 5 tags in your pocket. I would also argue that how hunters see deer is different as well. 5 tags makes deer seem like varmints, a nuisance animal, why even register them. One tag makes you feel lucky to even see a deer. I dont' think anyone in the state should EVER be able to harvest more than 3 deer in a season. The 5 deer intensive harvest is causes too big a shift in the population, especially on consecutive years, and in conjunction with harsh winters. More gradual drops or increases in population would work much better, also decreasing the effect mother nature might play. I think right now the DNR is too extreme on both sides. Not quiet enough and it's all lottery, a few too many and it's intensive harvest.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

million deer?

prehunt vs after hunt.

think some more.

prehunt... about a million according to the DNR.... we will come in at a kill of 100k this year.... so still about a million will be alive after the season ends....

Whats about a million??? Your guess is as good as mine, but double whatever it is, and you are saying it could be 2 million next year. Thats some good recruitment.

[hockeybc69]

Quote:

I wonder how many of the people complaining of low deer numbers took advantage of bonus and intensive harvest permits in the past?my guess would be nearly everyone..

No doubt. How many people of the deer hunting population follow forums, read DNR reports, spend lots of time in the woods.... etc.... Sadly, the vast majority are weekend warriors I am afraid... how are those people going to make any informed decisions? They are told here is what you can shoot and they do it.

Ask 100 people what the DNR prehunt population estimates are for the previous 10 years, what the population goals are for each area, what the overall harvest totals were over that same period of time, etc....

Very few know it, and how many would even know where to go find the info? Not very many.

People trust what they are given. And here we are now.

[smsmith]

prehunt... about a million according to the DNR.... we will come in at a kill of 100k this year.... so still about a million will be alive after the season ends....

Whats about a million??? Your guess is as good as mine, but double whatever it is, and you are saying it could be 2 million next year. Thats some good recruitment.

I think to the DNR "about a million" means anywhere from 500k to 2 million

[B. Amish]

think of it this way.

10 deer.

5 are does and average twins = 15

3 are fawns and have 1 between them = 4

2 are bucks = 2

10 deer turn into 21 with max recruitment (easy winter). i don't care what the state population is or anybody says it is.

[smsmith]

think of it this way.

10 deer.

5 are does and average twins = 15

3 are fawns and have 1 between them = 4

2 are bucks = 2

10 deer turn into 21 with max recruitment (easy winter). i don't care what the state population is or anybody says it is.

Twin fawns around here have been rare the last few years. Last I checked the recruitment rate the DNR states is 1.9, that's not going into season...that's at fawn drop. Consider fawn mortality before season starts and you're a lot closer to 1 than 2. I have not had any doe fawns drop fawns the following year the last several years either, so throw that number out.

Your 21 becomes a lot closer to my 15

[96trigger]

Quote:

No doubt. How many people of the deer hunting population follow forums, read DNR reports, spend lots of time in the woods.... etc.... Sadly, the vast majority are weekend warriors I am afraid... how are those people going to make any informed decisions? They are told here is what you can shoot and they do it.

We pay people to do this. I think that is what most are upset about. People that own land and are familiar with their deer herd can make informed decisions. Unfortunately, that is a small percentage of hunters. That means the rest rely on the DNR to give accurate information.

[BuckSutherland]

think of it this way.

10 deer.

5 are does and average twins = 15

3 are fawns and have 1 between them = 4

2 are bucks = 2

10 deer turn into 21 with max recruitment (easy winter). i don't care what the state population is or anybody says it is.

You do know your original number is 19 correct?? Then you have to figure.

3 will be eaten by wolves

1 will be killed by a bear

1 will die from natural causes

1 will be hit by a car

1 will be poached

So I think 10 maybe turns into 12 next year.

[creepworm]

I wonder how many of the people complaining of low deer numbers took advantage of bonus and intensive harvest permits in the past?my guess would be nearly everyone..

It would also be interesting to see how many people complaining of low deer numbers were in the Fill the freezer with does and let the little bucks walk crowd.

Two of the most vocal members of this site when it comes to deer population were in this crowd not even 10 months ago. Interesting how fast a person can change their cause, isn't it?

[B. Amish]

You do know your original number is 19 correct?? Then you have to figure.

3 will be eaten by wolves

1 will be killed by a bear

1 will die from natural causes

1 will be hit by a car

1 will be poached

So I think 10 maybe turns into 12 next year.

i don't have wolves so i don't factor them. no bear either.

5 + 3 + 2 = 10.

[B. Amish]

Twin fawns around here have been rare the last few years. Last I checked the recruitment rate the DNR states is 1.9, that's not going into season...that's at fawn drop. Consider fawn mortality before season starts and you're a lot closer to 1 than 2. I have not had any doe fawns drop fawns the following year the last several years either, so throw that number out.

Your 21 becomes a lot closer to my 15

and the last couple winters weren't easy, were they?

and the dnr number i'm sure is an average.

i'm talking easy winter, which would probably be above average, right?

that's why i said a tough winter could cause population to actually drop instead of increase at all.