I got the deer facts

[grizzald]

I finally received deer harvest information for zone 424 from the DNR a few days ago. I knew the numbers were gonna be down but not this bad. The harvest chart went back 13 years with 1996 being the best year with 2,257 deer taken in 424. Here's the kicker, in 2006, there was a total of 495 deer taken in 424. It's been a stedy decline since '96. Now this includes all three choices of wepons combined. Now granted we had that bad winter in '96 killing a lot of fawns in our area, but we havent had a bad winter since and numbers SHOULD be on the rise. I feel the main factor is way to much hunting pressure. One hunter does not need to take 3 three deer in a season. Thats just over doing it, especially in a area that doesnt have any deer left. What got me was in a email I received from the DNR they stated that "we no the numbers are low in 424, and we may take action in future years". Why not take action now! It's only gonna get worse from here on out until something is done.

[Whoaru99]

And to think 2006 was a record harvest overall. Some areas must have done REALLY well. From what I saw in zones 424 and 416, the pickings were pretty slim in the areas I could hunt.

[jlm]

Griz, I highly recommend that you call and speak or email the DNR regarding your findings. There are some major DNR brass that visit this site from time to time as well, hopefully they see your post and look into this. One thing for sure, do not jump to conclusions until all the information ouot there is know. Has the number of hunters been steady since that time, has land been locked up by private owners, etc. Could be lots of explantions. I am not trying to get your goat, just trying to be objective. Sounds like you are passionate regarding your hunting area!!! Great to hear. What do you think would be beneficial as far as management goes?

[sweept]

Where do you guys find the info for your area? Our group hunts 416 and we would like the info also.

[Jameson]

Some of my hunting is in 428. I recently was told that a farmer less than a mile from where I hunt found a coyote den last year with 24 fawn skulls/ skeletons outside of the den. Of course I missed the only darn coyote I seen this season. Do you see many coyotes in 424?

[BLACKJACK]

You know I've been hearing this 'xxx fawn skulls in coyote dens' story a lot, its almost becoming one of those urban internet myth stories. I'd like to see some pictures, some proof rather than the same old retelling.

[Whoaru99]

I've not seen the skulls, but LOTS of scat in the areas I hunt. Saw only one coyote off stand and flushed one out on a push - hear them fairly often though. FWIW, the (few) gut piles we ended up with went largely untouched during seasons as best I could tell.

[dstrey]

They usually leave the gut piles untouched for a while anyway. They dont like all the human scent around the pile.

[Jameson]

Sorry, I had never seen it on the web before. I usually believe things that farmers in overalls out in the field tell me. Those farmers....I thought there might be some exaggeration to it!

I saw 11 total deer during my 428 rifle/muzzy hunting this year. I think 3 were yearlings, 2 were bucks. With the neighbor getting another buck. I think that 3 of 12 ratio is OK. But of course would always like to see more deer! Get them yotes!

[wallegator]

Quote:

---

Where do you guys find the info for your area? Our group hunts 416 and we would like the info also.

---

Sweept,

This link may help, scroll down to 2005 Deer Hunting.

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/wildlife/populationstatus2006/populationstatus2006.pdf

Wallegator

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Where do you guys find the info for your area? Our group hunts 416 and we would like the info also.

---

This is a much better link for deer harvest information. It breaks it down in a bunch of different ways: 2005 Deer Harvest Report

[BLACKJACK]

Interesting report!!! Two numbers that I found interesting:

1) There were 59,000 All season licenses in 2005 and they shot 33,000 deer. When people start talking about deer numbers being down, they blame the All-season license "people are shooting 2 or 3 deer". The numbers don't substantiate that.

2) The 4A vrs 4B harvest numbers show that more deer are generally shot during the first, shorter season. I would have thought that it would have been the other way around, more days to hunt in the second season would equal more deer shot.

When do the 2006 numbers come out?

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

Interesting report!!! Two numbers that I found interesting:

1) There were 59,000 All season licenses in 2005 and they shot 33,000 deer. When people start talking about deer numbers being down, they blame the All-season license "people are shooting 2 or 3 deer". The numbers don't substantiate that.

2) The 4A vrs 4B harvest numbers show that more deer are generally shot during the first, shorter season. I would have thought that it would have been the other way around, more days to hunt in the second season would equal more deer shot.

When do the 2006 numbers come out?

---

I think I can answer both questions;

1) All-season hunters don't shoot any more deer per person than other hunters. In both cases, about 75% of hunters shoot 1 deer, 20% shoot 2 deer, and 5% shoot 3+ deer. The issue with the all-season hunters is that in lottery areas, they can take up to 3 antlerless deer. That'll likely change this year. But, to sum it up, giving people more tags does not generally increase the deer harvest. Yes, we all know people who kill 3 deer; however, you'd be comparing an individual against the population. While an individual kills 3 deer, the population only kills 1.

2) 4A has more hunters and gets 'first crack'. With the advent of the all-season and multi-zone license and youth being able to hunt both 4A and 4B, about 80% of hunters have the ability to hunt in 4A. So, the majority of harvest occurs in 4A. Actually, if you break the harvest down by day, it looks the same as Zone 2. What I mean is 60% of the harvest happens the first weekend and 40% the rest of the season. The percentage of daily harvest looks identical between zone 2 and zone 4A/4B.

As for harvest, the total is now on the DNR website. I can't tell you when the full harvest report will be available.

2006 Total deer harvest

[wallegator]

Quote:

---

I think I can answer both questions;

---

lcornice,

I responded to a statement about antler point restrictions, I was under the impression they were being tested as a tool that could be used to control population, by replacing the harvest of yearling bucks with does. It seemed most people think the restriction is just for trophy hunters, could you clear this up?

[lcornice]

Quote:

---

lcornice,

I responded to a statement about antler point restrictions, I was under the impression they were being tested as a tool that could be used to control population, by replacing the harvest of yearling bucks with does. It seemed most people think the restriction is just for trophy hunters, could you clear this up?

---

You're correct. APR's, earn-a-buck, and early antlerless seasons are being tested as population management tool with a benefit of maybe saving a few bucks. They are currently not being evaluated in Minnesota primarily on the merits of saving bucks. However, if the shift is made to antlerless harvest and proper population management is the result, the by-product is a buck gets to live longer (see my comment about hunters only shooting one deer). In areas where doe harvest is not a concern (e.g., most of zone 4), the issue of antler point restrictions gets a little tougher to institute. In those cases, you're telling hunters they can't shoot a doe (if they don't have a tag) but you're also telling them they can only shoot a certain type of buck. With short seasons in some areas (which happen to be the same areas with limited doe harvest), you may have a situation where a person has no opportunity to harvest any deer. I think the last thing anyone wants is to design a regulation that encourages people to quit hunting. So, the current research project is designed to evaluate alternative deer management strategies that 1) lower populations, 2) have broad hunter support. Saving a few bucks may be a positive byproduct of sound population management.

I'm not sure if I've answered your question or generated a bunch more

[wallegator]

lcorice,

Thanks for the response, that is what I thought, nice to know I am on the right track.