Deer hunters dissatisfied

[Lee Borgersen]

Some Minnesota deer hunters dissatisfied with goal-setting process

 Apr 5, 2015

Some deer hunters who served on citizen panels to advise the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources on deer population goals say they’re disappointed with the process. They feel hunters were underrepresented on the panels and that the framework of the process unfairly constrained them.


But others say the citizen advisory panels represented diverse interests and that outcomes were appropriate.

Evaluating a block of five North Shore deer permit areas, a panel recommended increasing the deer population in just one area, called for no change in two areas and reached no consensus in two other areas.

Another panel, debating deer numbers north and west of Grand Rapids, voted to increase the deer population by 50 percent in one permit area. Some hunters on that panel would have preferred to vote for an even greater increase, but the DNR’s framework didn’t allow for that. Rather than not reaching a consensus, the hunters settled for a recommendation of a 50 percent population increase.

Craig Engwall, executive director of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, said the frustration level of MDHA members who served on advisory panels was “very high.” On Thursday, Engwall wrote a letter to Leslie McInenly, big game program leader for the DNR, outlining his concerns about the process.

“There was great commitment by the team members (representing MDHA) to the process,” Engwall wrote. “The constraints of the last meeting were very frustrating for them and did not lead to a product that reflects what they felt.”

But others on the citizen advisory teams defended the makeup of the groups and the recommendations they came up with.

“I’m pretty certain almost every member of the (North Shore advisory) team was a deer hunter,” said Mike Schrage, a wildlife biologist with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and a member of the North Shore advisory group. “I think deer hunters were well-represented there.”

Nancy Hansen, DNR area wildlife manager at Two Harbors, sat in on the North Shore advisory group’s meetings.

“Even most of the folks who were opposed to increasing deer numbers in some places were avid deer hunters themselves,” Hansen said.

She said those hunters opposed increasing deer numbers because doing so could inhibit forest regeneration and potentially be harmful to Minnesota’s declining moose population.

Deer carry a brainworm that can lead to the death of moose.

‘Disappointed’ Shawn Perich of Hovland served on the North Shore advisory council. He’s a deer hunter and a member of the Minnesota Forest Resources Council.

“I was disappointed in how it turned out,” Perich said. “If you’re hunting in eastern St. Louis, Lake or Cook county, you can expect deer hunting to be the way it’s been.”

“I thought the (panel’s) numbers were swayed in the DNR’s favor before it started,” said Brad Trevena, a regional director with MDHA and a North Shore citizen panel member. “I think the (DNR’s) big game people had particular goals in mind. I don’t feel that hunters’ perspectives were taken enough into consideration.”

Advisory panel member Bill Lannon of Duluth Township agreed.

“My impression is that we were heavily stacked in favor of forestry,” said Lannon, a deer hunter and Realtor. “The concern and the voice was not present at this meeting for the economic benefits of white-tailed deer. There was not a voice for hunting camps or hunters. … The conversation would circle back to the deer population affecting the forest.”

Greater increases sought Doug Appelgren of Wirt, vice president of MDHA, served on an advisory group for a block of permit areas north and west of Grand Rapids. Wirt said he felt deer hunters were well-represented in his advisory group. But he and several other hunters in the group wanted to increase the deer population by more than the 50 percent allowed by the DNR’s framework.

“My recommendation was for a 100 percent increase,” Appelgren said. “But the structure gave way too much power to a minority that wanted to see no increase or a decrease.”

Engwall, MDHA’s executive director, told the DNR’s McInenly in his letter Thursday, “It is MDHA’s position that the DNR should not only strive for increases above 50 percent in certain Deer Permit Areas, but that history shows that increases above 100 percent can and should be attained within several years.”

Moose vs. deer Concern over moose also was an important consideration in areas where deer and moose overlap, Lannon said.

“We were choosing between the species,” he said. “There was a lot of worry about the moose. It’s difficult to choose one species over another because I want the moose to rebound, too.”

“I think moose need to be a priority in the Arrowhead,” Schrage said. “The moose’s problems are complex. One of the strategies has to be keeping deer numbers at their current low level.”

Panel member Molly Thompson of Normanna Township near Duluth represented North Shore landowners.

“I don’t think there was quite enough landowner representation,” Thompson said. “But I think the DNR did a good job trying to represent everyone. I think it was a good process.”

Widespread process

The DNR’s goal-setting process is being conducted in many, but not all, deer permit areas across the state. Goals already have been set in some permit areas, and others will be considered next year. Deer population goals were last revisited about 10 years ago. At that time, citizen panels recommended bringing down deer numbers from their record high levels of the early 2000s.

Severe winters in the past two years have taken a further toll on the deer population, but DNR wildlife officials say the mild 2014-15 winter should help the deer population rebound.

DNR wildlife officials had hoped the citizen advisory panels could reach a consensus, defined as an 80 percent “supermajority” of panel members, in their recommendations. That happened in three of five permit areas along the North Shore. In two others, a majority of panel members could not agree, and no recommendations were issued.

After reviewing public comments on the citizen groups’ recommendations, the DNR expects to make a final decision on deer population goals by June. 

Earlier this winter, the DNR accepted public comments on deer population goals by mail, email, online and through written questionnaires. Verbal comments were received at public meetings in each goal-setting block. More than 1,650 comments were received, DNR officials said.

To comment The public can offer comments on deer population goal recommendations by visiting the DNR website at mndnr.gov/deer. Comments also can be made by email to deergoals.dnr@state.mn.us and by mail to: Attn: Deer Goals, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155. Comments will be accepted through April 15.


[attachment deleted by admin]