Expected worst Deer harvest in 20 years!

[smsmith]

If you really think that is the solution then you are part of the problem, The deer herd hasn't died off because wolves can walk on top of deep snow, "because they can't" or because it has been cold and snowy, " which they are more then capable of surviving and used to be the norm" the Deer herd has been killed off because it's being ran by foolish biologist at the DNR, who publicly stated years ago, that they wanted to diminish the overall state herd by 25% well they succeeded.

They succeeded times 2 I believe...

[CANOPY SAM]

In response to Don's statement above, which seems to be a prevalent opinion here on FM, and on other forums, I would ask this. First please know that I don't know the answer to this question myself...at least in terms of Wisconsin.

If the harsh winters, and wolf population increase are of no consequence to the low deer numbers we're now seeing, and our alleged incompetent land managers in the state of Minnesota are the only reason our deer herd is suffering so badly, then how can you explain the gross reductions in deer herds to both the states east and west of us as well? Or at least in North Dakota?

Are the game and fish managers in Wisconsin and North Dakota all so miserably bad at their jobs that they are all causing a major big game reduction thru poor management practices in all our neighboring states as well? Are they all "in" on a secret agenda to systematically take away one of our prized natural resources?

The truth is, what "Fever" says above is exactly correct. There may have been a few poor decisions in regard to previous year's particular harvest levels in particular areas, but there is absolutely no question that the overall decline in our deer herd, and neighboring state's deer herds, are the result of a COMBINATION of factors, many of which are completely outside of the DNR's, and Game and Fish Dept's control.

The "let's find a scapegoat" witch hunt mentality has got to stop.

It's so easy to hide in the shadows and take cheap shots at those that have the courage and desire to lead, and make positive change. It's cowardly, and does absolutely nothing to improve our situation.

Please, do us ALL a favor. Keep the negativity, blame and shame stuff to yourselves. For those of us that can actually see the forest for the trees, your constant negative blaming is falling on deaf ears.

I love the earlier statements on this page. Be a part of the solution, or please keep your unproductive comments to yourselves.

[jay83196]

I agree with some of what you said canopy, however from a person in an area that was intensive harvest for years it's hard not to see fault and have frustration in the poor management in the area....and aren't forums about putting out opinions and discussions? Or is it only ok to have one if you or others agree with them! Everybody is entitled to their opinion, don't like it, buy a magazine and read that!

[smsmith]

I didn't realize you were the decider on what people can or cannot post. If everybody agrees on everything here, it would be a downright boring place to visit. If you don't like the threads dealing with dissatisfaction on our deer herd, the solution is pretty easy....don't click on them or read them. Problem solved. You're welcome

[FISHINGURU]

Albert Einstein : When all think alike, no one thinks very much.

[BuckSutherland]

there is absolutely no question that the overall decline in our deer herd, and neighboring state's deer herds, are the result of a COMBINATION of factors, many of which are completely outside of the DNR's, and Game and Fish Dept's control.

What a joke and a pantload of garbage. There are basically 4 ways a deer can die.

1. Humans and their weapons (guns, bows, cars)

2. Predators (wolves, bears, coyotes, dogs, big cats)

3. Weather (and usually it needs to be extended periods of horrible weather)

4. Disease

Pretty sure the DNR has control over the humans and the predators and says what can and can not be shot. Weather they have absolutely ZERO control and disease in the grand scheme of things is minimal. They might not be able to control the weather, but they sure could have clamped down on harvest, this year especially and they could open up more opportunity to harvest some of these predators. Did they not look at their winter severity index when it was over 180 by last March?? I, along with many others critical of the DNR could have went without a season this year. Its not about me, my tag, or meat in the freezer. I dont need to kill the dam things to enjoy them. I dont know why the hell its so hard for some of you to understand that.

[rockman]

Then don't buy a license if you could have went without a deer season this year. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand? Obviously nothing has changed here at Silly Town II in recent times. The same hypocritical bunch of nonsense, by the usual clowns trying to impose their view on others.

[smsmith]

A couple facts:

1. Winter of '12/'13 was quite snowy and spring '13 didn't arrive until towards the end of the first week of May here in central MN.

2. The DNR's response to this ^^ was INCREASING the number of Managed and Intensive units fall of '13.

3. Commissioner Landwehr informed his staff he wanted a more conservative season structure in '13...but some Area managers and folks in St. Paul ignored what the Commish instructed.

Those 3 facts alone are enough for me to continue to be a DNR detractor and to voice my displeasure with DNR deer management in this state.

[CaptainMusky]

A couple facts:

1. Winter of '12/'13 was quite snowy and spring '13 didn't arrive until towards the end of the first week of May here in central MN.

2. The DNR's response to this ^^ was INCREASING the number of Managed and Intensive units fall of '13.

.

I'm not calling you a liar but provide the stats to back this up as it is certainly not what I observed in the areas I hunt. All areas went from intensive to managed within 50 miles of where I hunt.

[Red Miller]

I can attest to fact No. 1. I recall floating around on Lake Mille Lacs bouncing off the ice cubes during fishing opener 2013. And in the first week in Dec. 2012, we got dumped with snow and it stayed until the first week in May. That was the winter before last. And last winter was almost the same except that there was more snow and one heck of a lot colder. It killed several of my landscape shrubs. The last two years in 247 we were hunters choice. We went lottery this year.

In my opinion, the last two winters along with the predators killed one heck of a lot of deer. A (no season) idea is the last thing the DNR wants. That $15M+ in revenue down the tubes, not a chance! And to take that one step further, any idea that alienates "average joe" hunters or their kids will go in the same garbage can.

[BuckSutherland]

Then don't buy a license if you could have went without a deer season this year. Why is that so hard for YOU to understand? Obviously nothing has changed here at Silly Town II in recent times. The same hypocritical bunch of nonsense, by the usual clowns trying to impose their view on others.

And what harm does buying the license do other than lightening my wallet?? Maybe I was going to hunt another part of the state(and I did), maybe I was gonna shoot a wounded deer if he came by, maybe I would have filled my wolf tag, maybe I would have gotten that shot at a once in a life-time 12 pt. Just cause I bought the license and went out doesnt mean I am kill crazy. It was gonna take something very special or unique set of circumstances to pull the trigger for me to pull the trigger up in 172.

Some of us can see past our own selfish needs and have something larger than our own wants and desires in mind. I like to think my decisions to do hard work today are gonna pay off for one of the kids hunting my property 5 years from now.

[Farmsfulltime]

DNR supporter here I think they do an excellent job given the (conditions ) they work under and it isn't going to get easier, A lot of differing views on deer management statewide and a thankless job as you are always wrong no matter the direction you take everything considered maybe some should be thankful we can find some professionals to take on the job .

[jay83196]

Conditions? What conditions nature? No different than neighboring states. A lot tighter rules in place than WI thats for sure and our results are worse....I don't doubt it's a difficult job but thats no exscuse, certainly no free pass like a lot of people like to extend them for some of the mistakes and poor results in both fishing and hunting management. Two examples Mille lacs and several hunting areas (156 being one example) years of poor regulations in place caused both to decline.

[smsmith]

I'm not calling you a liar but provide the stats to back this up as it is certainly not what I observed in the areas I hunt. All areas went from intensive to managed within 50 miles of where I hunt.

I don't have the links handy. Just Google up the 2012 and 2013 deer unit maps and count the number of Managed and Intensive units in each year.

[hockeybc69]

2012

40 - HC

23 - managed

6 - intensive

2013

32 - HC

30 - managed

8 - intensive

2012 the harvest was down from year prior. Winter of 2012-2013 was bad.

Lets increase the total possible kill for the 2013 season. And even with increased permit availability, we still shot less deer in 2013 than the year before.

Good sound management decisions.

[laker1]

Friend in North Dakota has to wait 3 years even to get a whitetail license in his own state.

Most of Wisconsin is South of the north end of Mille lacs so it is usually much warmer and less severe winters.

I wonder can you compare states .

[Farmsfulltime]

Theres a lot of comparing being done in fact the plan is to push wisconsin management style in Minnesota ,Watch for it it will come soon via the groups howling for change Just a heads up maybe two weeks , at least by the end of the year

[Red Miller]

You guys are too funny. A couple of bad winters and a bad deer hunt and ...wah, wah, wah!

Lets point the finger and find someone to blame (and hang). Everybody talking smart. Some day you will figure out that you cant manage mother nature. She will kick your *ss every time. Put your big boy pants on and read it and weep.

[smsmith]

Theres a lot of comparing being done in fact the plan is to push wisconsin management style in Minnesota ,Watch for it it will come soon via the groups howling for change Just a heads up maybe two weeks , at least by the end of the year

Hahaha...too funny FFT. Do a bit of fact checking. WI just implemented a public stakeholder process...like MN has. Only theirs is legitimate and doesn't have pre-selected decisions by their DNR. In other words, a true "public" stakeholder process. Members of their teams are from private Forestry, Farm Bureau, WI Dept. of Tourism, the WI Conservation Congress, and sportsmen groups. The WI DNR has representatives on the teams too, but they are not voting members. They are there to answer questions and provide (legitimate, science based) data. Teams vote whether to increase, decrease, or maintain the deer herd. The WI DNR does retain the right to "overrule" the team decisions if they don't make any biological sense (like say if the teams voted to increase the herd in Shawano and Waupaca counties where densities exceed 100 dpsm in spots). Time will tell how their process works, but the vast majority of WI deer hunters I've spoken to are pretty pleased with it.

[laker1]

Change in quota's and management for deer is changing,now you have advisory committees forming etc. Let it takes it coarse,if it doesn't work,than ask for a audit etc.

Look around the country and many states wildlife management is all politics.

[Farmsfulltime]

Lots of unhappy complainers in Wisconsin too sometimes even the same ones as in Minnesota , This group will never be happy no matter how the seasons are changed im just happy that there are a majority in Minnesota that can see thru the smoke and know that what we have works well and wont drastically be changed a few less doe tags one maybe two years, Have the stakeholder meetings voice your concerns that's what its for fast forward 5 years look in the mirror and what we have had in the recent past is what we will have then

[smsmith]

Change in quota's and management for deer is changing,now you have advisory committees forming etc. Let it takes it coarse,if it doesn't work,than ask for a audit etc.

We shall see the outcome of this round of public stakeholder meetings. If they're legitimate and the recommendations are made without being told in advance what the outcomes are going to be by the MN DNR...I'll be pleasantly surprised. I don't have a lot of faith in them seeing as one unit in SE MN made a legitimate recommendation of 18 dpsm and was overruled by Leslie. Seems like the outcomes were pre-ordained once again. If that's the case...why even have them? Just a waste of the team members' time and our tax dollars.

[Farmsfulltime]

Outcomes are pre determined but you want in have a seat at the table go thru the process that what its for

[smsmith]

Outcomes are pre determined but you want in have a seat at the table go thru the process that what its for

Huh? That makes zero sense to me. Outcomes are pre determined but I should sit there and waste my time to find out that whatever I say has no impact on the outcome? Sure...that makes a lot of sense.

I applied, if I get on the team I will indeed sit through the process. If it is legitimate, I will say so. If it isn't, I will say so.

[laker1]

I think somebody has to make sure other head wildlife personnel get involved beside Leslie.

I also think most of wildlife staff are going into these meeting open minded. These staff members for the most part care very deeply. They spent many years in College etc. because they care about wildlife and hunting for the most part.

Advisory committees fail when the average citizen doesn't get involved.

Forestry ruled many of these committees in the past because the forest industry pushed many of their own people onto these committees with their own agenda.

.

SmSmitm I give you credit for trying to get on a committee

[Farmsfulltime]

Im sure you will

[hunter76]

Here's my 2 cents. Quit have the gun season during the rut! Let these bucks at least get the chance to breed the does. I even think a buck lottery system should get implemented. At least in SW MN do it. Having the slug season during the rut is just plain stupid in my opinion. And people wonder why we never get the "monster bucks". Hmm, I wonder why?

[docc8]

Wow. I have been reading all these posts and am dumbfounded by the responses. I hunt 178 and this year has been the worst I've ever experienced including the early 90's. I saw one deer in 7 days Everybody wants to point the finger at the DNR or the government The fact is the harvest numbers are down primarily from our last 2 winters and wolves. Everybody within 2 miles of us practice selective harvest and won't harvest anything less than an 8 pointer. Also we haven't harvested a doe in probably 10 years. To say its from over harvest in our area is a lie. The last 2 winters have kicked the dump out of our deer heard. We have trail cam picks from last winter with snow up to the chest of deer. It's sad but it's out of our control. pray for a better winter but it's not looking good. I suspect we will have a shortened season next year if this keeps up

[laker1]

The north zones had two very hard winters in a row. Not since the 1995-97 era has it been this hard

[Early Riser]

During my walks in our 3 square mile hunting area in far NE MN, I came to believe that the last two winters were very hard on fawns and some of the more mature bucks. I shot my buck by noon on Monday after seeing 6 mature doe just that morning. The deer seemed to be concentrated and wolf sign was down as well. There were large tracks of land with virtually no deer sign, and comparatively little buck sign in particular.

I would defer to the biologists, but I did wonder a bit while out int he woods if a hunter's choice of one buck or one doe might make more sense in terms of balancing the population in areas of low hunter density by saving some of those more viable 1.5 year old bucks that could grow into the kind of deer we like to see more often.