MN DEER DENSITY INITIATIVE

[smsmith]

In my ideal world I'd have a proactive and interested DNR deer management team with a comprehensive plan designed to effectively manage our deer herd statewide.

Leave it up to me?  I'd like to see 221 managed for 18-22 dpsm pre fawn.  I'd use biological carrying capacity to determine that density range (BCC for most all of the transition zone is somewhere around 60-85 dpsm...managing for 30%ish of that range is well within the social CC)

Achieving that range would require going to lottery for at least 3 years most likely.  Monitoring and maintaining that range would require doing aerial surveys, spring roadside counts, utilizing hunter/public observations/reports of deer seen, watching buck/doe harvest numbers, etc. etc.

[stevejedlenski]

that seems pretty involved for one game species. would you have a team for deer, bear, grouse, pheasant...? not to mention there are a lot of permit areas. the reason the DNR doesn't do this is because it would cost 100 times their annual budget. yes they are responsible for providing deer management for the state but not just for hunters, farmers, insurance owners, the annoyed home owners, etc (much of which would like lower deer numbers).


im not trying to say that anyone is wrong here, but you have to look at the big picture.be thankful you have a DNR that actually listens to the public. like they did this year.

[smsmith]

that seems pretty involved for one game species. would you have a team for deer, bear, grouse, pheasant...?


im not trying to say that anyone is wrong here, but you have to look at the big picture.be thankful you have a DNR that actually listens to the public. like they did this year.

Not at all...they already do something like this for every unit in the state.  They just don't have good quality data inputs going into the population model that is used.  Marrett Grund and Lou Cornicelli have both stated publicly several times that aerial surveys need to be done at least every 4-5 years in the transition zone to insure the model works as intended.  It had been over a decade since any aerial surveys were done outside SE MN until last winter. Roadside surveys used to be done for deer...they aren't anymore.  Fetal analysis of road killed does used to be done to help determine fawn recruitment....not anymore. 

No, I wouldn't have a team for those other species.  Why?  Because they don't bring $18 million in license revenue annually.  Whitetail deer license revenue contributes greatly to managing many other fish and game species.  Since they are the "cash cow"...I'd be making doggone sure they remained that way. 

The ONLY reason the DNR "listened" this year was thanks to the efforts of the MDDI and MDHA.  Without that, we would not have the conservative season structure we do.  I have it on good authority that when the new regs came out, at least one Area Manager was very upset and wanted a more liberal season on antlerless deer in central and eastcentral MN.  He was overridden by someone in St. Paul

Hunters pay for deer management in this state....as well as for managing many other fish, game and non-game critters.  We should have a some pretty strong input as to how things get done.  Other folks should as well, but they're not the ones putting $18 million into the DNR coffers.

[deadeye]

I think stevejedlinski was right on.  The cost to do the surveys suggested by smsmith would bankrupt the DNR.  All that would be nice but cost is prohibitive.  We are best served with an approach that meets the needs of many with out excessive costs born by a few.  As stevejedlinski said, there are a lot of other groups that could demand recounts to satisfy their desires. 

[Wicked Jester]

I agree, stevejedlenski makes a good point about cost. But also the fact that more than just hunters have interest in deer management. As a hunter, I want to see more deer, but at the same time I'm not to wild about seeing deer when I am on my motorcycle. Finding a balance is tricky. Maintaining that balance with the unpredictability of our winters is quite a challenge to say the least.

[smsmith]

Yet another way to make your opinion known...if you support the audit sign the online petition
http://www.change.org/p/mn-legislative-audit-committee-perform-audit-of-mn-dnr-deer-model-and-herd-monitoring-techniques?share_id=arWMfhRekE&utm_campaign=share_button_action_box&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition


Don't rely solely on the online petition however, if you support the audit doing the following is also important.  You can find who your elected are here:
http://www.gis.leg.mn/OpenLayers/districts/

If you want to help push the audit fwd, simply add your electeds name to the top, and your name to the bottom of this email and add basecampbrooks@gmail.com to the cc so he can add the elected to the list.  Fwd any replies you receive from your elected-

ELECTED NAME,

Many in MN are very concerned with the decline in deer numbers in the last 10 years, and in working with the DNR have discovered they either dont know or dont believe the herd has been taken back so far.

Please review the following information, and let us know if you can support the audit described that will up for review next session.

http://mnbowhunters.org/2014/08/14/is-your-elected-going-to-bat-for-the-states-deer-hunters/

Thank you for your attention, the residents of MN can use your support on this issue.

YOUR NAME