what would you do?

[jigglestick]

myself included, there has been a lot of DNR bashing going on. not just here. the general consensus seems like the DNR is doing it wrong.

my question to you and myself is what would you do different if you were in charge, and substantiate you plan with reasoning.

this seems only fair for the amount we tend to disagree with the way deer herds are currently managed.

I'm from Minnesota and though Wisconsin has some different rules than we do, I think we face the same basic issues regarding to the herd.
...............................................

My biggest point would be to quit knee jerking to the diseases.
I believe these diseases have been around since god was a kid.
it's natures way of controlling the herd as far as populations go for how well the land can support the numbers that inhabit it, as well as building an ultimately healthier herd.
i compare this to getting sick. the strong will shake it off and become a stronger unit because of it.
the weak will perish.
trying to control the disease by irradiating the herd does just the opposite.
you smoke every thing without letting nature do the culling.
as hunters, we shoot any deer we see fit to shoot. that might have been one of the ones with the weaker genes, or it might just as easily be one of the ones with the stronger genes.
to let nature sort them out is the only logical way to get through this.

I would let the numbers stay, going to an across the board one deer tag, and maybe a lottery for a second deer if numbers allow.

kids shoot free until they're sixteen. one tag either sex.
keep them involved and keep the numbers high enough to at least spot a deer on public land.

I have no science to back up my ideas, just what seems to be common sense to me.
I don't feel I have the right to bitch if i don't have any ideas how to do it better.

lets hear your ideas.

[Moving2thecountry]

I think the DNR does a pretty good job, personally.  But I am far from an expert.

But I do have some ideas:

In conjunction with MnDOT, put up IR detectors with warning indicators along certain roads to reduce deer car collisions.

Put up "Pack your trash out" signs on public land and WMAs. 

Encourage hunters to take their spent shell casings out in hunting regulations.

Encourage hunters to bury gut piles if the ground is not frozen.  (I am assuming that gut piles attract wolves and coyotes.  If that is not the case, scratch that.)

Improve some WMAs, e.g., by allowing volunteers to do the work.  By improve, I mean allow the planting of certain plants or trees preferred by deer, clearing of brush and blow downs (broken birch trees, e.g.), packing litter out, etc., on an approved proposal basis, or a DNR generated list.  Allow those who volunteer to get a bonus permit for the upcoming season after 16 hours of time, or provide some other incentive.

[Cody Gruchow]

i dont think the DNR is doing a bad job, for what resources they got. whenever there is a cut in the state the DNR is usually right at the top of the board of being cut first. i may not like some of there rules but im not going to  about them. i dont hunt public land very much, so i dont cant say any type of rules or regulations they should have. we do pick up are shell casings if we can find them, im not going to dig through long grass for 10 minutes to find a 30-06 spent casing, when its not hurting anything. as for gut piles we use to bury them but the critters would dig it up anyways, so its kind of definying the purpose. i agree with jigglestick on that kids should get to to hunt for free, but only till the age of 13, if you have them hunt for free until the age of 16 certain groups will take advantage of that, yes its getting them into the woods maybe not. what i want them to start being harsh on is poachers, no more slaps on the hands and saying "naughty dont do that anymore" like the guy from cannon falls i want him to serve jail time and lose his privialges(sp) for good in this state, he ignored the rules. thats the biggest thing is people ignore the rules and the DNR is understaffed, and have to constatly go to calls by people whining about perminatant stands on WMA when theres bigger things for them to find such as the cannon falls guy. ok just my 2 cents

[22lex]

If I were the DNR;

I would keep listening to input from the majority of the hunters in the state and try to keep the gap between MDHA/BWA/and the average hunter from expanding beyond control.

I would also realize the limitations of what the counts are from year to year, and expand the ratio of + and - in certain areas that seem under/over populated and do the best I could with tags/ratios based on calculated densities.

I would also realize that trophy status varies from hunting clubs, to deer camps, to the average hunter and tread lightly on what comes in the future.

Lastly, I would handle this within the confines of the DNR.

[wildlifeminnesota]

 
 First of all I would fire Cody Gruchow     
more slaps on the hands and saying "naughty don’t do that anymore" like the guy from cannon falls I want him to serve jail time and lose his privileges(sp) for good in this state, he ignored the rules. that the biggest thing is people ignore the rules and the DNR is understaffed, and have to constantly go to calls by people whining about perminatant stands on WMA when they’re bigger things

Cody, Because you want know more slaps on hands but you are will to do just that! It is post on WMA Land that they are breaking the law!!   When they put permanent stands on WMA.
I would post a bigger fine for the first time. They do it again bigger fine and lost the hunting right for three year. Three time a bigger fine and loss of hunting for good and two day in jail. That would take care of the call. They ignored the law, no matter how big or small it the law. Them
I also would up the tag $$$$ for out of stat hunter.$$$$$   
I would Put a law in place for younger deer.   
No fawn tag for does! Fawn you would not be hunted at all!!   
As for Buck, to help get more trophy.
You buck would have to have three point on one side!!         


  

[guythathunts]

NO buck restriction - that's just crazy talk!

I like any ideas that get youth more involved.

Harsher fines/punishment for rule breakers.

No shining - ever - Shinning is generally done by kids and poachers. There are little to no benefit's to shinning that I know of.

Land owners need to step it up and call when they have people breaking laws and the DNR or local law needs to enforce these laws and react in a timely manner.

DNR needs more staffing and the staff needs to do their job more efficiently - I hunt a ton and NEVER see DNR enforcing the law. I hunt in a fairly populated area and the only time I have ever seen the DNR was when they were stopping snowmobiles or taking surveys. I have been stopped by the DNR 3 times in one weekend fishing to take a survey (actual DNR and not volunteers) and was never asked to see my license. I even asked if he wanted to see it and the response was "Nope just doing surveys". If I got pulled over by a cop to take a survey and not asked for my license and registration - I would crap!

The rules and regulations need to be clearer - We discuss topics on MNO like this all the time - It is E-Z enough to write laws that have defined boundaries - Leaving laws to interpretation has good guys treated like bad guys - That is dumb.

I should be in consulted on all rule changes, be given ample time to respond and payed a ton for my input - After all I know everything... BUWAHAHAHA!!!!!!

[Go Big Red!]

First of all I would fire Cody Gruchow   
more slaps on the hands and saying "naughty dont do that anymore" like the guy from cannon falls i want him to serve jail time and lose his privialges(sp) for good in this state, he ignored the rules. thats the biggest thing is people ignore the rules and the DNR is understaffed, and have to constatly go to calls by people whining about perminatant stands on WMA when theres bigger things

Cody, Because you want know more slaps on hands but you are will to do just that! It is post on WMA Land that they are braking the law!!  When they put perminatant stands on WMA.
I would post a bigger fine for the first time.They do it again bigger fine and lost the hunting right for three year. Three time a bigger fine and loss of hunting for good and two day in jail. That would take care of the call.They ignored the law, know mater how big or small it the law. Them
I also would up the tag $$$$ for out of stat hunter.$$$$$ 
I would Put a law in place for younger deer. 
no fawn tag for does! Fawn you would not be hunted at all!! 
As for Buck, to help get more trophy.
You buck would have to have three point on one side!!       

What?  Let's not start another "tough talk" thread.  CG gaves his opinions and you can take it for what it's worth.  But if that's the route you want to go, proof read what you type next time.

The DNR is struggling with funding and that's obvious.  That is status quo for years to come and we all know it.

If it were me:

1.  Disease control is survival of the fittest.  It's nature's way of thinning the herd.  If not disease, harsh winters and deep snow blocking food sources will cover that.  But I guess we can call Mother Nature and tell her to take a hike.  It's out of our hands.

2.  Increase penalties for criminal activity when it comes to wildlife, WMA, etc.  Stiffer fines, confiscation of weapons, vehicles, loss of privileges, mandatory reform courses, etc.  We're never going to stop a person from acting a certain way and that's the way we're programmed.

3.  Get more kids involved.  Educate them. Inspire them to take part in the outdoors.  Doesn't need to be hunting/fishing driven, but make them aware of what is beyond their backyard or computer screen for that matter.

4. DNR needs more $$$ and more boots on the ground.  We also should have well established hunting organizations join up with the DNR (do they do this already?) on a local level. 

5.  One tag isn't a bad idea, but some people do rely on the meat more than others so are we taking food off of someone's dinner table?

6.  What about increasing license prices for everyone including res and non-res?  I can hear people wince already....

Time to go to work....   

[deadeye]

Hey guys, maybe we are barking up the wrong tree.  The DNR does not make any of the rules and laws.  These are make by the Minnesota Legislature.  The DNR simple enforces the laws and regulations.  Perhaps we should monitor our state reps and see just what they are doing.  During each legislation session, I usually watch what goes on regarding the "fish and wildlife" bill.  You would be surprised just how little input the DNR has during this process. 

Below is a list of the DNR CO's duties.  I don't see anything regarding writing or introducing laws.

Conservation Officer
Become a Minnesota DNR Conservation Officer
Conservation officers (COs) are responsible for enforcing laws and regulations under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. As a licensed peace officer, conservation officers enforce laws related to fish and wildlife, state parks, trails, forests, waters and wetlands. They also perform public relations and education duties throughout the state.

Conservation Officer Work
DNR conservation officer positions exist to provide public safety, resource and recreation protection response to DNR field operations, including fish, wildlife, recreation, commercial, water and wetlands, environmental crime, state parks and trails, according to applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

Conservation officer work involves:

Law enforcement: COs enforce all authorized statutes and regulations; enforce all authorized recreational, environmental and emerging issues statutes and regulations; identify needs, develop methods and implement plans to detect violations; investigate complaints; process criminal violations and arrest violators; seize and preserve evidence; and conduct audits of natural-resource licensed commercial operations.

Safety and adult training: COs support hunter and recreational vehicle safety training courses, recruiting and maintaining a volunteer instructor pool, providing required training aids and assuring classes are scheduled.

Public relations: COs communicate DNR goals to the public by personal contact or actively seeking media and speaking opportunities, and provide assistance with injured or nuisance animals.

Cooperative relationships: COs maintain working relationships with other DNR units and all law enforcement and other related agencies.

Administration and reporting: COs work out of their homes and prepare and submit reports on their work.

[Go Big Red!]

Hey guys, maybe we are barking up the wrong tree.  The DNR does not make any of the rules and laws.  These are make by the Minnesota Legislature.  The DNR simple enforces the laws and regulations.  Perhaps we should monitor our state reps and see just what they are doing.  During each legislation session, I usually watch what goes on regarding the "fish and wildlife" bill.  You would be surprised just how little input the DNR has during this process. 

Below is a list of the DNR CO's duties.  I don't see anything regarding writing or introducing laws.

Conservation Officer
Become a Minnesota DNR Conservation Officer
Conservation officers (COs) are responsible for enforcing laws and regulations under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. As a licensed peace officer, conservation officers enforce laws related to fish and wildlife, state parks, trails, forests, waters and wetlands. They also perform public relations and education duties throughout the state.

Conservation Officer Work
DNR conservation officer positions exist to provide public safety, resource and recreation protection response to DNR field operations, including fish, wildlife, recreation, commercial, water and wetlands, environmental crime, state parks and trails, according to applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

Conservation officer work involves:

Law enforcement: COs enforce all authorized statutes and regulations; enforce all authorized recreational, environmental and emerging issues statutes and regulations; identify needs, develop methods and implement plans to detect violations; investigate complaints; process criminal violations and arrest violators; seize and preserve evidence; and conduct audits of natural-resource licensed commercial operations.

Safety and adult training: COs support hunter and recreational vehicle safety training courses, recruiting and maintaining a volunteer instructor pool, providing required training aids and assuring classes are scheduled.

Public relations: COs communicate DNR goals to the public by personal contact or actively seeking media and speaking opportunities, and provide assistance with injured or nuisance animals.

Cooperative relationships: COs maintain working relationships with other DNR units and all law enforcement and other related agencies.

Administration and reporting: COs work out of their homes and prepare and submit reports on their work.

Very interesting.....  Makes sense to me......   

[jigglestick]

oh come on, the Department of natural resources is is way bigger that just conservation officers.

fisheries, forestry. you make it sound the dnr is only law enforcement.
anyway, law enforcement is only a small part of the issue.

[HD]

I was thinking about a graduation buck tag.

Kinda like, you shoot a buck bigger than the one you got last year.
Shoot what you want till age 16 (or whatever young age)
Once you get to an eight, that's the smallest you can shoot.
Pretty hard to control though........

Course, it's just a thought. 


                                                         

[HUNTER2]

I think they should close hunting to everybody except me

[beeker]

more/better enforcement.. I don't think anyone here will defend a poacher or a cheater.

maybe some kind of permit for public land, so people know how many people are planning to hunt the same area.. kinda like what they do with the boundary waters. then you'll know how many people will be in the same area and maybe adjust your plans. (I know just a thought its not perfect)

 I like the raising of out of state license, I would do that one further and make them apply for a buck tag, and just like some other states it'll have to be of a minimal size when you get one if you get one at all... (that's for SD and all the years I put in for a tag and never got one) ohhh and then for ND, you can't hunt public land the first week of the season. what goes around comes around

DNR also needs to stop catering to the businesses.. we don't need to stock every dang lake just because someone opened a resort there. sorry if your business does poorly.. but it's not the states responsibility to hold your hand.

stop the ghestapo act when the CO does stop someone. (sorry I'll respect the badge, but the man wearing it needs to earn it) and when it comes time to offer more tax dollars I'll remember what a dink you were and vote against you.

DNR is no longer allowed to listen to tree huggers anti hunting people. 

[MTCOMMER]

more/better enforcement.. I don't think anyone here will defend a poacher or a cheater.

maybe some kind of permit for public land, so people know how many people are planning to hunt the same area.. kinda like what they do with the boundary waters. then you'll know how many people will be in the same area and maybe adjust your plans. (I know just a thought its not perfect)

 I like the raising of out of state license, I would do that one further and make them apply for a buck tag, and just like some other states it'll have to be of a minimal size when you get one if you get one at all... (that's for SD and all the years I put in for a tag and never got one) ohhh and then for ND, you can't hunt public land the first week of the season. what goes around comes around

DNR also needs to stop catering to the businesses.. we don't need to stock every dang lake just because someone opened a resort there. sorry if your business does poorly.. but it's not the states responsibility to hold your hand.

stop the ghestapo act when the CO does stop someone. (sorry I'll respect the badge, but the man wearing it needs to earn it) and when it comes time to offer more tax dollars I'll remember what a dink you were and vote against you.

DNR is no longer allowed to listen to tree huggers anti hunting people. 

Im with you on that, I think stricter penalties for those who break the laws, like the guy that shot that monster in Cannon Falls is a perfect example, they said he is going to be fined maybe $2,000 and he cant hunt in MN for 3 years... I think he should be banned forever.  if he was dumb enough to take 3 dear, possibly out of season (if he indeed used a gun and not a bow) whats to say he isnt going to do it again, it just ruins everything for the rest of us law abiding outdoorsmen.  And gives bait to the ANTI-hunters out there.

Personally I think the DNR does a pretty good job, I am happy with their services and I would be up for paying a little more for my license every year.
And in regards to stocking lakes/ponds/mudholes that arent worthy of it, I think its a waste of time, money and THE FISH!  If the resort really wants their area to be stocked they can pay some extra cash (or something to that nature)!

[dakids]

The DNR does a great job with the money and manpower they have.  IF all of the special interest groups would just keep their opinions to themselves.  They (spec. int. groups) generally speak for a minority.  Law makers make new laws that have no input from the DNR or do have input from the DNR but just don't use it.  Every hunter should take a servey when they buy a lisence and that info should be used by the DNR to help with any changes that are wanted by the majority (2/3 needed for change)

Eliminate the ARTS from any bill regarding wildlife.
KIDS HUNT FOR FREE UNTIL 18    I have 4

[BiggA]

I like some of the previous ideas.
Keep special interest groups out!
Kids hunt free till 16. It works for fishing why not hunting.
The permit idea for public land sounds like an idea to bat around. Would be great for determining deer numbers vs hunter numbers.
As far as stricter penalties I think if they had the man power to enforce more laws so many people would not be willing to break them. (Ban someone for life for poaching? I dont agree with that but take their equipment, suspend their rights and fine them maybe bigger fines.
I would eliminate the early doe season for sure!
Would also push the rifle season back a week or 2 later.

[JohnWester]

you think banning a guy from hunting for three years or for life is going to stop him from hunting? hell he poached in the first place... nothing new to him. Stiffer fines, penalties. I agree lifetime ban from hunting in the state.  But stiffer penalty, especially for multi offenders.  I disagree with raising non-res.  We don't have the best hunting here now, and I doubt non-res people are shooting that many more deer.  We are already higher then some of the others.  Non-res is not the issue.

[Scoop]

Once a poacher always a poacher. They need to be deported thats the only way its going to stop. Not like it will happen but a dam good thought. Or we could cut off thier hands i like that better. years of jail time is the only way its just like murder is it not. We will never have it the way we want.

[22lex]

Once a poacher always a poacher. They need to be deported thats the only way its going to stop. Not like it will happen but a dam good thought. Or we could cut off thier hands i like that better. years of jail time is the only way its just like murder is it not. We will never have it the way we want.

I guess in my opinion the thought of sending a guy to jail for lets say a period of 3-5 years for poaching is borderline stupid, and a waste of resources needed to harbor other criminals. I'm not condoning poaching by any means, I just don't think jailtime is the way to go.

Extending the years they cannot hunt in this state, and multiplying the X factor of money up quite a bit would probably be a better idea. Kind of like MT and their trophy status for deer, elk, and ram. It used to be upwards of a 25K fine to poach a bighorn Ram, and 15K for an Elk. That should be deterant enough.

But then again I do agree with everyone that says "once a poacher, always a poacher" 'cause nothing will probably stop them from doing it again in some other state.

BTW I do like permit areas for public lands to know how many people are out there, and applying for a certain permit area.