Interesting article.....I'm originally from the Rochester area and have hunted deer there many years. It's a tough place to hunt as private land abounds and the good woods areas are jealously coveted. The deer population is generally good but hunting by shotgun hampers things a tad.....not that I'm advocating use of big game rifles.....
It's at least good to see what appears to be a sincere effort by the DNR to make for a better hunting environment. I started hunting Wisconsin many years ago when it was clear the hunting was far preferable there.....even for the non resident license.
I have lived in Minnesota all my life and to be honest if you own enough private land its decent hunting,but on public land the Minnesota DNR does very little to improve deer hunting for residents or non-residents .
I have lived in Minnesota all my life and to be honest if you own enough private land its decent hunting,but on public land the Minnesota DNR does very little to improve deer hunting for residents or non-residents .
Thats funny as hell. Tell everyone you know that’s how hunting is here.
I have lived in Minnesota all my life and to be honest if you own enough private land its decent hunting,but on public land the Minnesota DNR does very little to improve deer hunting for residents or non-residents .
I hunt all public land and have never had much trouble seeing deer. Yes, some years are better than others, but we always have a good hunt and fill some tags. We were 3 for 3 last year and done before noon on the first morning. All on public land.
I have lived in Minnesota all my life and to be honest if you own enough private land its decent hunting,but on public land the Minnesota DNR does very little to improve deer hunting for residents or non-residents .
Thats funny as hell. Tell everyone you know that’s how hunting is here.
Maybe he means if you stay withing sight of a road......
I have lived in Minnesota all my life and to be honest if you own enough private land its decent hunting,but on public land the Minnesota DNR does very little to improve deer hunting for residents or non-residents .
I hunt all public land and have never had much trouble seeing deer. Yes, some years are better than others, but we always have a good hunt and fill some tags. We were 3 for 3 last year and done before noon on the first morning. All on public land.
I guess I need to spell it out better: if you want a little deer like a fawn, doe or small buck, ya Minnesota has enough small deer for its brown its down hunters. but MInnesota has very few nice bucks to hunt in the upper half of MInnesota on public land,mostly caused by too many wolves and poor DNR management. yes I see plenty little deer back in the Tamaracks,just not many big bucks anymore. > if your a non-resident why would you to try and hunt this state unless you want just a small deer or a trophy forkhorn ? > Minnesota DNR has a problem and just maybe the next governor will make some big changes ? if you a resident and only hunt here in Minnesota and have never been to a different state that has nice bucks runnin around your miss`n the fun !
We will have to agree to disagree Pete. I have 3 bucks that I'd call big on the wall that all came from MN public ground. All from northern St. Louis Co. There are guys on here that shoot a lot more impressive deer than I do from MN public ground as well. Does it happen every year for me? No. Not even close, but that's part of the fun for me. The hunt.
I hunt other states as well and will agree they do have more deer than northern MN. I have dozens of trail cam pics, again, all on public land in MN of what anyone would call a trophy buck.
+++++1 What Tzone says.
Northern Mn public land can be tough hunting. Where we hunt Cass county there is barely any hunters left compared to 25 years ago. I have plenty of trail cam pics, of deer that even southern MN hunters will say that's a nice buck. Not enough hunters, wolves, big tamarack swamps, hard to shot over 75 yards in most places.. Makes it a challenge for sure.
[quote=pete53
I guess I need to spell it out better: if you want a little deer like a fawn, doe or small buck, ya Minnesota has enough small deer for its brown its down hunters. but MInnesota has very few nice bucks to hunt in the upper half of MInnesota on public land,mostly caused by too many wolves and poor DNR management. yes I see plenty little deer back in the Tamaracks,just not many big bucks anymore. > if your a non-resident why would you to try and hunt this state unless you want just a small deer or a trophy forkhorn ? > Minnesota DNR has a problem and just maybe the next governor will make some big changes ? if you a resident and only hunt here in Minnesota and have never been to a different state that has nice bucks runnin around your miss`n the fun ![/quote]
Really? Really?!!!
If you are serious, maybe you ought to consider doing a little bit of research on where you can hunt and what the deer populations are there. There are places where deer are overpopulated and underharvested closer to you that you likely imagine. If you find those areas, yo will find big deer. All you need to do is just look.
[quote=pete53
I guess I need to spell it out better: if you want a little deer like a fawn, doe or small buck, ya Minnesota has enough small deer for its brown its down hunters. but MInnesota has very few nice bucks to hunt in the upper half of MInnesota on public land,mostly caused by too many wolves and poor DNR management. yes I see plenty little deer back in the Tamaracks,just not many big bucks anymore. > if your a non-resident why would you to try and hunt this state unless you want just a small deer or a trophy forkhorn ? > Minnesota DNR has a problem and just maybe the next governor will make some big changes ? if you a resident and only hunt here in Minnesota and have never been to a different state that has nice bucks runnin around your miss`n the fun !
Really? Really?!!!
If you are serious, maybe you ought to consider doing a little bit of research on where you can hunt and what the deer populations are there. There are places where deer are overpopulated and underharvested closer to you that you likely imagine. If you find those areas, yo will find big deer. All you need to do is just look.
[/quote]
>>>don`t worry about me "old Pete53' I do just fine , but let`s be honest for a non-resident its not easy hunting for a decent buck compared to out west in Minnesota ,where I see 50- 100 deer a day and some decent bucks every day too out west. let`s not forget the DNR are not doing there job good enough ! do you realize the person in charge of Minnesota deer in the DNR that this person has never hunted deer ? have you ever been to a deer meeting with the Minnesota DNR ? do you think our liberal governor Goofy is really doing anything to help ? Minnesota has a serious wolf problem in half of the state ,if your from the southern half of the state or twin cities you have no ideal how bad it is up north !
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
Yeah, cutting is good. Old growth don't support much life.
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
PA had the same problem. They’ve started cutting in the Allegheny National Forrest again after decades. There was hope it would help Ruffed Grouse populations, but there’s something else at play and the RG is still struggling.
>>>don`t worry about me "old Pete53' I do just fine , but let`s be honest for a non-resident its not easy hunting for a decent buck compared to out west in Minnesota ,where I see 50- 100 deer a day and some decent bucks every day too out west. let`s not forget the DNR are not doing there job good enough ! do you realize the person in charge of Minnesota deer in the DNR that this person has never hunted deer ? have you ever been to a deer meeting with the Minnesota DNR ? do you think our liberal governor Goofy is really doing anything to help ? Minnesota has a serious wolf problem in half of the state ,if your from the southern half of the state or twin cities you have no ideal how bad it is up north !
>>>don`t worry about me "old Pete53' I do just fine , but let`s be honest for a non-resident its not easy hunting for a decent buck compared to out west in Minnesota ,where I see 50- 100 deer a day and some decent bucks every day too out west. let`s not forget the DNR are not doing there job good enough ! do you realize the person in charge of Minnesota deer in the DNR that this person has never hunted deer ? have you ever been to a deer meeting with the Minnesota DNR ? do you think our liberal governor Goofy is really doing anything to help ? Minnesota has a serious wolf problem in half of the state ,if your from the southern half of the state or twin cities you have no ideal how bad it is up north !
You don't know what you are talking about.
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
Yeah, cutting is good. Old growth don't support much life.
I've been hunting clear cut areas for years now.
From fresh cut to about 15-20 years old is best,then it becomes to grown up and thick to see them, unless they are close.
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
Scott, the forest areas around our camp are being harvested full swing, have been regularly for quite some time now. I honestly get a little nervous that soon nothing will be left lol. Hopefully this helps our deer rebound from the bovine TB management disaster we had in our area.
As far as this topic and some of the comments, I'm not for a more detailed management plan. We are hunters, the king allows us to take a deer from his kingdom in trade for money paid to the king. That's enough goddam management for me. When you drill down deeper with fine print conditions on how to hunt the kings deer, the king can shuvhisdeeruphisass. It's a liberal move and I'm sure liberal hunters would love it.
"this state sucks, there are no big horns, I need the big horns and it's the states fault for not making everybody pass on the small bucks"
I say F-you, go hunt somewhere else if you think it's someone else's fault that you can't find a big buck. If you are to that point where you want the state to throw conditions on all of your fellow public land deer hunters so that you might be able to get a better deer more easily, I'd really rather you just get your checkbook out and buy yourself a high fence hunt. If I choose to pass on a small buck, that's fine. My decision. But the thought that my kids or other young hunters can't shoot a spike or a basket because some QDM Nazis got there way on a state level? F that, I'll go to war againstthatshit.
We have big bucks, and you don't have to own a bunch of land to get them. You do have to put some work into your hunting efforts though (or many times people just get stupid lucky with very little effort). That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.
I think hunting and fishing regulations should move forward with the rule that for every single new regulation, two old regulations need to go away.
Some guys might find it hard to understand, but big horns are not a priority for all hunters. Detailed management efforts to improve the "quality" of the deer because some hunters figure all deer should look like high fence freaks, nope, F that. No thanks.
Northern Dave, I live part of the year and own some land north of skime,i seen what happened to my deer hunting area and how poorly the DNR handled the 10-15 years of the Mexican T.B. cattle problem that ruined deer hunting,caused by a rancher from Skime buying a bull from southern Texas for breeding his cows,that unknown to the rancher and never was tested had Mexican T.B. spread thru the deer herd and other rancher`s cow herds. out of all the 1,000`s of deer shot by sharp shooters only .04% had the disease , that small % was near the 1st ranch too. then on top of that 2 long cold snowy winters destroyed and killed more of the deer herd,and wolves did very well too during this time also. now the DNR can`t figure why the elk population in that area is lower than normal now, its simple less deer wolves need to eat so now wolves kill elk,bear, maybe a moose and rancher`s livestock. we both know how well the deer population was before the T.B. disease came in and now the deer population is still a lot smaller than it was. I too want kids to enjoy seeing deer and if they want to shoot a small deer great in my book ! good to all deer hunting this fall. Pete53
Some guys might find it hard to understand, but big horns are not a priority for all hunters. Detailed management efforts to improve the "quality" of the deer because some hunters figure all deer should look like high fence freaks, nope, F that. No thanks.
I now hunt to teach my kids. The deer I shoot now are for our freezer. We eat 3 a year if we can. I shot a small buck last year and was happy as hell to do it.
But I'm with Dave, I do not want the state to tell me the size of deer I can shoot. There are enough rules already. I go in the woods to enjoy the hunt, the camp, the food, the company, the food, the fires, the bullschit, the food, and the stories around a cool busch light.
We have big bucks, and you don't have to own a bunch of land to get them. You do have to put some work into your hunting efforts though (or many times people just get stupid lucky with very little effort). That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.
Truth.
But there is no question there are less of them today than about anytime in my 30 years of hunting.
I think hunting and fishing regulations should move forward with the rule that for every single new regulation, two old regulations need to go away.
This heap good plan Kemosabe
An out of state observation, fwiw...had 20+ seasons in or near boundary waters--I suppose that is "north" enough...
Minne has the same issues as Michigan, 500,000 hunters and they all are right, all the time. My Dad always said, "son, retail is for gentiles". Good on anyone or any organization that tries to keep the bitching to a dull roar.
Forests change. Deer need chow and the cutting clear provides that. Wolves move deer around to different areas in bigger country, much further than farmdog does barking up some trespassers.
From what I can tell so far in Michigan, regarding the wolf "introduction"-- both species adapt for survival. Not so, many hunters. The absolute best outcome for deer are when the wolves managed on the local level.
Sometimes a guy has to work a little harder when the old honey hole dries up...:)
Pete, yeah I know about Roger's cattle and that whole mess. It's a sore subject (mostly the management efforts).
I did see more deer last season than I have for probably about 10 yrs though. My camera pictures from last year show more deer and encouraging numbers of healthy young bucks, a lot of which would have made many hunters very happy. I do think they are rebounding.
Less involvement from the dnr is what I'd personally like to see. It's my personal opinion that when it comes to nature, if you try to steer it in your desired direction, you almost ALWAYS put it in the ditch.
Obviously as seen in my post above, I get cranky when I figure folks want the state to "fix nature". I'm of the firm opinion that those that want to "manage deer quality" need to make it a personal priority and a personal effort. But don't force it on your fellow man. Work hard, buy land, possibly with like minded hunters as a group effort. Get your land and QDM the bejesus out of it. Then bitch about the neighbor that shot "your deer".
If that doesn't work, build a fence, buy some deer, buy the right genes, breed per your goals, supplement antler growth with your own personally engineered efforts, buy/sell/trade etc. Pick one out and shoot it.
I am however 100% onboard with reintroducing a wolf season. Why the hell wouldn't we want that? I don't know a deer hunter that doesn't want a season on wolves, horn and meat hunters alike.
We have big bucks, and you don't have to own a bunch of land to get them. You do have to put some work into your hunting efforts though (or many times people just get stupid lucky with very little effort). That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.
Truth.
But there is no question there are less of them today than about anytime in my 30 years of hunting.
I guess so. But every year I can still go down to the local hardware store and look at the pictures on the big buck board and the big deer are never not on that board. I sure as hell don't find them, but I think it's maybe because I don't look real hard. lol!
Although I left MN near five decades ago, I'm still involved in our old camp at Dentaybow.
The number of deer hunters in that area is about 25% of what I saw in 50s and 60s.
I don't recall MN DNR ever being very active in deer management other than regulating
season dates and closures etc.
Minnesota's problems are not just in the DNR as there are a multitude of bureaucracies
issuing more feel good regulations and taxes.
Are there any Hmongs on the committee?
Minnesota's problems are not just in the DNR as there are a multitude of bureaucracies
issuing more feel good regulations and taxes.
Agreed.
DNR just gets to be the punching bag for when things don't go well for everyone. I believe they simply carry out and enforce decisions that are cooked up by many interests.
I give you that the winters are a big issue. Michigan took the opportunity to blame the initial wolf kill-off on the harsh winters. This one didn't help.
But, and it is just an opinion, in the last few decades there is more attention on big racks than ever. And the equipment is better, expert knowledge is now common knowledge, and seasons have all expanded. Dat's revenue. When we first started hunting Kansas better than 20 year ago (IIRC), an older lady in a restaurant asked me where I was from and why I was there. She thought I was nuts for driving that far for a deer. The locals I knew then thought weekends were sufficient. Now high school kids are talking in B&C points. The business guys I knew from Detroit added "trophy" rooms bigger than half my house... Geez...
The pressure is on.
I recall when MN closed the deer season state wide in 1973. That closure brought around the system of zones and permits now so commonly seen here. From the end of WWII to that point, the DNR closed the season in the south zone approximately half the time and the north zone a handful of times due to low deer populations. Tags were good for any deer and few, if any, passed up a shot as deer were so uncommon.
Hunter numbers were much smaller than today and success rates were not as high due to the low number of deer. Large racks were not as plentiful as then since any deer was fair game and a spike was as prized as a Thurdy pointer.
Those who have been deer hunting in MN the last 25 years or so have never had it so good. It is not near the peak of the early 2000's but even today is so much better than 1974-1990. During that time it was thought One's chances of tagging a deer was virtually zero without drawing a highly coveted doe tag where percentages went up to the teens. The week before deer season in November 1979 had a half dozen hunters ask permission to hunt our farm because a buck was seen running across the road- in August. Even seeing deer tracks was a topic for weeks and anyone who shot a deer got their picture in the local paper after registering it. Bagging a deer, any deer, was a big deal back then and most today never experienced such adversity.
I'll take today over 40+ years ago gladly. Even public land has deer if one wishes to put in the effort. Big bucks are more common today than in the "Olden Days" due to more deer but it is the stories, tales, and legends people like to cling to. It's been two seasons I haven't drawn a doe tag, at least two more since one could take a doe in my zone. Still, I am happy as I've seen more deer most days than in a season when I started and my not shooting a buck has been the result of passing on smaller ones rather than not seeing any.
The biaching being done today is nitpicking as they are complaining of not bagging a record book buck. Be fortunate you are not considering the season a success because you saw a deer track- once.
In this thread we figure out who HUNTS and who HARVESTS.
You actually have to HUNT if you want a big woods northern MN buck. And, to be successful more than a small percentage of the time, you have to not suck at hunting AND have the time..
Sounds like like I should head to the Chickenbuck camp to see some deer. Northern Wisconsin seems to be worse. Last year, my son and I didn't see a deer. Granted, we didn't try very hard and for good reason. We have about given up. I am glad to say I did see a bear opening day and altogether we kicked up 14 grouse. The deer hunting is just terrible and it is vein flogged off aggressively to boot. I was there last week and hardly a twig to be found that was browsed. A pile of deer droppings here and there . I saw no deer or wolf kills. I got so disappointed that I took off to Upper Michigan. Upper Michigan is not known for a lot of deer. I went to the Hiawatha National Forest, got out , took gps and compass reading and followed a river upstream for about 3/4 mi. I walked 100' and noticed more deer track . I found the deer number were several times higher if you count deer droppings and trails. Minnesota does some thing right. One is they start the season two weeks earlier and that is huge in the big woods cause it starts at the thail end of the rut instead of when the bucks are all worn out and half rutted to death. The bucks are tired and do not move much. This and the suspicion that the neighbors are still poaching is the only realistic conclusion I can think of. I'd love to try northern Minnesota . I bet I'd do better.
I started killing deer back in the 50s. I hunted a fair amount where deer season unofficially opened in late August. 1965 was a hard year and it killed a lot of deer with low fawn production on top of the winter kill. 1669 was more of the same.
During even those historically tough years I had to hunt places I had never hunted before. Some places had deer, some didn't. I ate deer year after year. I quit shooting bucks bigger than spike/forks about 72ish. But...Before I quit I did learn two things important to shooting bucks. First, they don't have the same dietary need as does and second the "old ways" of driving out every piece of country holding deer works well to move the bucks out to where they can be shot.
If you want bucks you either have to go to them and kick 'em out to where you want 'em or you learn where they live and hunt them there.
I hunted in places where there were wolves the whole time and off and on in places where there were non wolves. They never seemed to me to be much of the reason for no deer.
Northern Wisconsin seems to be worse. Last year, my son and I didn't see a deer. Granted, we didn't try very hard and for good reason. We have about given up.
My son and I hunt northern WI. We hunt public land southern Douglass and northern Washburn Co's. I'm not sure if we found a pocket of deer over the last 5 years or if the numbers are up. I do know in the area we hunt, it's been bucks only, except for kids 16 and under, for over 5 years.
I have to be honest. It's been fantastic hunting for us. There are enough deer to see actual rut activity. Rubs, scrapes, bucks sparing on trail cam's.
We do hunt northern St. Louis Co in MN as well. It's not been nearly as good. But we get a deer every so often. I seem to get a buck there every 2-3 years or so. I never seem to see the rut sign like we do in WI for some reason. A little bit, but not like we do there.
Thanks TZone, it is encouraging that the whole state is not as bad as where I hunt. I dont know why but 2017 season was so bad it was unreal. The dee numbers should be up and seemed to be in the winter of 2016-17 according to the trail cams. Last week I pulled the SD cards and there were very few deer. There was not a buck on the cam since Nov. 10, 2017. Sure they drop their horns by February but ya think we would get a buck on the cam. Not even a buck you could tell shed their antlers. There is a lot of logging 1 mi. away and they could be heading for the logged tree tops. Very little deer sign though.
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
Scott, the forest areas around our camp are being harvested full swing, have been regularly for quite some time now. I honestly get a little nervous that soon nothing will be left lol. Hopefully this helps our deer rebound from the bovine TB management disaster we had in our area.
As far as this topic and some of the comments, I'm not for a more detailed management plan. We are hunters, the king allows us to take a deer from his kingdom in trade for money paid to the king. That's enough goddam management for me. When you drill down deeper with fine print conditions on how to hunt the kings deer, the king can shuvhisdeeruphisass. It's a liberal move and I'm sure liberal hunters would love it.
"this state sucks, there are no big horns, I need the big horns and it's the states fault for not making everybody pass on the small bucks"
I say F-you, go hunt somewhere else if you think it's someone else's fault that you can't find a big buck. If you are to that point where you want the state to throw conditions on all of your fellow public land deer hunters so that you might be able to get a better deer more easily, I'd really rather you just get your checkbook out and buy yourself a high fence hunt. If I choose to pass on a small buck, that's fine. My decision. But the thought that my kids or other young hunters can't shoot a spike or a basket because some QDM Nazis got there way on a state level? F that, I'll go to war againstthatshit.
We have big bucks, and you don't have to own a bunch of land to get them. You do have to put some work into your hunting efforts though (or many times people just get stupid lucky with very little effort). That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.
I think hunting and fishing regulations should move forward with the rule that for every single new regulation, two old regulations need to go away.
Some guys might find it hard to understand, but big horns are not a priority for all hunters. Detailed management efforts to improve the "quality" of the deer because some hunters figure all deer should look like high fence freaks, nope, F that. No thanks.
Dang ND... when you get on a roll... you roll far.
I'm in your camp except for one thing.
I call QDM Nazi's really QDM zombies... because they drink the kool-aid and buy the products....
Its when they push their agenda onto the neighbors and try to influence state policies that I agree with the Nazi name.
I'm sending you an electronic 24hrcampfire beer to toast by.
The hunting on my farm west of Bemidji has greatly improved since my time starting in the late 70s when my does tags went un-punched...
We let our guests take what they want and we just enjoy the hunt. We could probably get more bigger deer if we put more time in trail cameras. moving stands, and food plots, but that seems to take time away from the working cattle side of our farm and they are more tasty.
I overdid it a tish.
It's that whole "I know what's best for everyone" mentality that irks me.
I don't do deer drives, but it doesn't bother me if other camps do deer drives. No problems, but if someone says I HAVE to do deer drives, nope. I don't care for someone making me do a deer drive any more than I care to tell someone else they CANT do a deer drive.
Just an example.
Buy the license, shut up and hunt. lol
I don't care for the "My way is best for me and so I want everybody to be forced to do it my way."
Best of luck to all, hermit Dave out.
I don't think so Dave !
That's why you are so appreciated. Just an honest, straight forward, logical guy.
Sometimes, the snowflakes need to hear what is real !
I overdid it a tish.
It's that whole "I know what's best for everyone" mentality that irks me.
I don't do deer drives, but it doesn't bother me if other camps do deer drives. No problems, but if someone says I HAVE to do deer drives, nope. I don't care for someone making me do a deer drive any more than I care to tell someone else they CANT do a deer drive.
Just an example.
Buy the license, shut up and hunt. lol
I don't care for the "My way is best for me and so I want everybody to be forced to do it my way."
Best of luck to all, hermit Dave out.
Second beer sent. The volume was just right.
Beware if you step out on some of the MN facebook hunting groups... snowflake meltdown. Zombie-ism at its best.
Here`s my biggest problem with the DNR book smart people may be in charge but have no common sense city people. like the person who is now in charge of Minnesota state deer herd > this person has never deer hunted ,just how does that work ? DNR people should not even be hired unless they have purchased hunting and fishing licenses in Minnesota since they were kids . our state needs people that are hunters and fisherman at least they would have heart to improve hunting and fishing and yes understand what is needed.
>> yes and now let`s let the liberal`s say how we need these book smart liberals . your wrong ! we don`t ! over half the Minnesota DNR employees don`t hunt or fish and do want wolves to be continued to be protected also. I have my sources and all`s I can say this is dang shameful in Minnesota, one young man who enjoys the outdoors a lot quit the DNR because of how this practice continues with non hunters -non-fisherman liberals.
There's mentality among the QDM crowd that they are ENTITLED to and NEED to havest a Booner evey year, and that's just plain wrong. For the vast majority of hunters, a truly big buck is a once in a lifetime event, and there's nothing wrong with that. I too say GFY to those who feel they have the right to tell me what's legal to harvest. If you really need buckzilla that bad, buy him and be done with it.
High level philosophical question,,,,
Would you rather have a DNR full of neutral, possibly non-hunting, foresters and biologist directing hunting and land management versus a bunch of QDM zombies that say screw the forest, other game species, and farmers and let the deer population get out of control?
I'll take my chances with the neutral party than have a bunch of QDM Nazis shove their rules down my throat and how to hunt on my farm.
I'd take the QDM people if they actually knew what QDM is and how to correctly implement it rather than the ignorant fools who think QDM is shooting "big" bucks only or those who manage for a maximum number of deer whether the habitat can sustain it or not.
I have been involved with a multiple ownership contiguous 1000+ acre private land parcel camp in NW MN about 40 miles west from Northern Dave since the mid 1980's. Our land is surrounded by mostly inaccessible public land that has within the last ten years become a wildlife management area limiting access for the general public unless the public is willing to walk , which most are not . In the 1980's we used to see more moose than deer. Then moose disappeared. Deer hunting was good until a few years after the Skime area disease outbreak resulted in the sharpshooting of many uninfected deer causing wolves to move west since there were less deer in the Skime area. We now have a large black bear and mountain lions population living in our area and wolves that move through the area every few years in addition to the well established coyotes . Deer hunting varies depending upon the predators but large antlered deer are still taken every year in the area by those either lucky enough or skilled enough or willing to actually hunt for the deer instead of drive trails/roads and shoot whatever they see. Disagree with much of what the MN DNR does but most of the issue is that deer license buyers in NW MN today do not have many of the skills required to successfully hunt the wily whitetail in forest environments IMO. Flame suit on and looking forward to other viewpoints. I do not do facebook so am oblivious to that method of communication.
No flame suit needed! One thing some don't realize is that the wolves cycle through. If you don't have wolves in your area and you did in the past...there is a reason. The deer moved out.
I enjoy deer hunting in MN. But it's not because of the deer. It's because of the hunt. There is no where else in the US that you'll experience deer hunting like you can in northern MN. New England may come close though.
We can go round and round about the DNR on this thread but we all know it's not going to change anything.
wolves ? in the skime area wolves seem to stay in that area a lot because one big rancher calf`s in spring and another big rancher calf`s in the fall, both are within a mile or 2 apart ,so federal trapper is in that area setting traps a lot. Many of us in this area hope the next new Governor is not a liberal like our current governor goofy ! Jeff Johnson seems to understand our DNR problems and if he becomes Governor things just might change ?
MN and WI both have a multitude of issues in the northern halves of the state.
Yeah, wolves, bears, and some improper management are involved. But rarely do I see mentioned the lack of cutting on National Forest lands, and, in my mind, it's the biggest of the enchiladas.
The young growth that all wildlife needs to flourish is either in very small pockets or it simply doesn't exist at all.
Extreme winters have not helped the cause of late either.
Scott, the forest areas around our camp are being harvested full swing, have been regularly for quite some time now. I honestly get a little nervous that soon nothing will be left lol. Hopefully this helps our deer rebound from the bovine TB management disaster we had in our area.
As far as this topic and some of the comments, I'm not for a more detailed management plan. We are hunters, the king allows us to take a deer from his kingdom in trade for money paid to the king. That's enough goddam management for me. When you drill down deeper with fine print conditions on how to hunt the kings deer, the king can shuvhisdeeruphisass. It's a liberal move and I'm sure liberal hunters would love it.
"this state sucks, there are no big horns, I need the big horns and it's the states fault for not making everybody pass on the small bucks"
I say F-you, go hunt somewhere else if you think it's someone else's fault that you can't find a big buck. If you are to that point where you want the state to throw conditions on all of your fellow public land deer hunters so that you might be able to get a better deer more easily, I'd really rather you just get your checkbook out and buy yourself a high fence hunt. If I choose to pass on a small buck, that's fine. My decision. But the thought that my kids or other young hunters can't shoot a spike or a basket because some QDM Nazis got there way on a state level? F that, I'll go to war againstthatshit.
We have big bucks, and you don't have to own a bunch of land to get them. You do have to put some work into your hunting efforts though (or many times people just get stupid lucky with very little effort). That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.
I think hunting and fishing regulations should move forward with the rule that for every single new regulation, two old regulations need to go away.
Some guys might find it hard to understand, but big horns are not a priority for all hunters. Detailed management efforts to improve the "quality" of the deer because some hunters figure all deer should look like high fence freaks, nope, F that. No thanks.
Spot on you must be reading my mind. Though I hunt in Missouri.