Recent articles on deer hunting in IA, MN

Here is a copy of an email that Michael Sieve sent to Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Commissioner Mark Holsten. Mike gave me permission to post it here, it is a good read, enjoy.

, December 04, 2007 9:49 AM

Subject: Recent articles on deer hunting in Iowa, Minnesota

Dear Commissioner Holsten,

I am sending you a recent article by Curt Wells titled “AN UNIMAGINABLE WEEK OF HUNTING, AND WHY” from Outdoor News, November 23, 2007.In this article Wells describes the intensity and the quality of his recent hunt in Iowa. He describes the many encounters that he had with older bucks that week, including “the biggest buck I’d ever seen”. He describes this week as “The finest whitetail hunt I’d ever experienced.” The last paragraph of Wells article reads as follows; “Every state has to decide how to manage it’s deer, but if someone, anyone, tells you the timing of the gun season has no effect on the quality of the bucks in an area, well, they’re just flat out wrong.”

As it happens I was bowhunting in Iowa that week as well. My experience was as intense as the one Wells described. I also had the finest week of deer hunting that I’ve ever had. I also saw the biggest buck I’ve ever seen on that hunt. And I also believe that the timing of their gun season is the reason why deer hunting there is so good. My question to you is this; Why can’t Minnesota manage it’s deer with the high degree of quality that is found in Iowa. Please ask your deer biologists what can be done to give us a hunt like this right here at home. Why do we have to hit the road, spend our money on outstate gas, motels, restaurants, sports shops and more, when we could have the same right here at home? The genetics of our deer herd is just as strong as are Iowa’s. The deer population here in Minnesota is several times larger than is Iowa. And we have far more habitat and far better habitat here than they do there. And it’s not just Iowa. The same could be said of many if not all of our neighboring states. Minnesota’s problem is with it’s management and with the deer managers who refuse to consider what is so obvious to so many.

Even if the situation that I am describing to you is not obvious to the Minnesota DNR, it is becoming increasingly clear to other hunters and outdoor writers throughout the country. Allow me to cite a few recent articles and to quote what others have to say;

Steve Carney; “SEEING SERIOUS TROPHY-CLASS DEER IN ILLINOIS”. Outdoor News, November 9, 2007

“How Ironic to see more deer in two days of hunting Illinois than I see in an entire Minnesota season.”

Gary Clancy; “DECEMBER DEER DRIVES” Outdoor News, November 30, 2007

“My friends Barry and Gene Wensel (who lived and guided other bowhunters in Montana for many years before moving to Iowa for no other reason than the exceptional hunting that state affords…”

Daniel Schmidt; “STUNNING STATISTICS.” Deer and Deer Hunting, December 2007,

In his article Schmidt talks about the low bowhunter success rates in Minnesota and says; “Amazingly, only 25,350 deer were taken by bow-hunters in the entire state last year.” This is in sharp contrast to other areas and other states. According to Schmidt, in Waupaca County, Wisconsin bowhunters killed 5,499 deer last year. Over 20% if the total Minnesota bowkill from one county alone!

And finally in his article “MUZZLELOADING’S ROLE IN HERD MANAGEMENT” Deer and Deer Hunting, January 2008. Toby Bridges describes Minnesota and Wisconsin as “Slow Learners”.

That’s five articles in the last month.

In the past, and even now, Minnesota considers itself to be a leadership state. Can you say that about your deer managers and about the Minnesota system of deer management? If not, what will you be willing to do about it? I look foreward to hearing your ideas on this subject.

Hope you had a good deer hunt this year.

Sincerely,

Michael Sieve

Houston, Minnesota

Alot of the management, has to be done by us hunters ourselves. This letter, is focusing on Mature Antlered deer. I think the fact that in many areas of MN you can take 5 deer this year, should tell us, there are deer here, just not the right ones for this letter writer. Does Iowa have antler point minimums ? I do not know, that is why I am asking. Until hunters, start passing the young bucks, nothing will change, without antler point minimums. What does Iowa do that is so different ? Maybe the hunters are pickier ? I do not know. The letter points out problems, without solutions. What are they ? I am all for going out and seeing 5 shooter bucks everynight… I would have loved to seen even one tonight !!!

big g

Steve I got to comment on this because I grew up and live here and have spent alot of time in the woods and fields. Living here I’ve had a chance too see whats happened since I was a young kid around 10 years old and then the last 20 years.

In the early 50’s there wasen’t a season at all and the whole state was completely closed to deer hunting. Then after a few more years in some counties there was limited deer hunting in Iowa in the mid to late 50’s, limited because there just weren’t that many deer and in some counties hardly any at all, just a few.

In those fortunate counties farmers began to complain about the crop damage they were having on thier farms and the dnr considered a limited deer hunt. They opened up a few of those counties for bucks only because taking does out of population hampered any reproduction in any herd and was at that time out of the question.

A few more years went by and then a few more counties were opened to deer hunting and with a few counties letting the hunters take does because the population was alot more stable and the limited hunting pressure by hunters kept thier numbers in check. This wasen’t the whole state yet but quite a few counties, if I remember right, by the late 60’s to early 70’s. Also by this time the whole state had a halfway stable herd, in some counties not a real good population yet and in other counties the deer populations were really coming on strong.

I remember when I was a young guy about 12 years old Id use to walk to a creek close by on what was the edge of town then and fish, look at everything and do things young guys do that love the outdoors. I seen deer almost everytime I went there. They weren’t over running the area like they are today but there was enough of them that a guy could see them if he walked and looked for them.

With the dnr’s really good management techniques they now have populations in alot of counties in Iowa where you can take your time hunting bucks and pass up the ones that are still young because the buck numbers in the herd now are such that its a pretty good chance your going to see a bigger one for the wall in the den or living room.

With the habitat that we have here in this state and alot of it looks just like it does in southern Minnesota and western Wisconsin, good cover and a good food source, I know its the dnr’s management of the herd here thats produced opportunities for most of the hunters and especially bowhunters here to put a nice buck on thier wall.

Every guy I know that hunts deer has the very same opinions on why theres so many deer here. Everybody agrees its the forage they need to stay healthy and for healthy breeding and also to make it through the winter. The dnr’s management techniques Manages the whole herd but when it comes to the management of the buck herd every hunter also agrees its because they don’t allow gun hunting of any kind befor the first major rut and in my opinion the second rut also.

Heres another reason I think is why theres more quality bucks here then ever befor. Its common talk here not to shoot the smaller bucks because it just dosen’t pay. How are there going to be any full racked bucks if alot of guys shoot them befor they have a chance to show what thier made of and if their going to be quality racked bucks befor they spread thier genes around.

In states like Wisconsin and Minnesota where theres a higher population and alot more guys hunt this even becomes more critical. With alot of guys wanting too shoot a buck they are often tempted to take a young buck that would be really nice 2 to 3 years down the road. I’ve seen this happen here and it does work and Guys I know and myself wouldn’t think of shooting anything under whats considered atleast a 140″, why? hes not big enough to put on the wall yet is he? If hes smaller most guys let them go unless thier going down hill from age. Most older bucks still have thier mass from when they were in thier prime, just not the numbers on mainbeam or tine length anymore.

The last few years on the site here I’ve heard guys talk about thier management techniques and what they were going to do. Now those same guys have nice deer walking in the woods and in thier area. It will eventually catch on with most hunters to let the small bucks grow into nice ones, its only a matter of time with them hearing everyone else talk and seeing what they do and practice.

You guys here on the site know that late season is when the animals and birds and flock up. Here late Janurary its not uncommon to go to places where you can see 50 too 200 in a herd, the guys here on the site that live here see this too. In very high populated areas the dnr and also the farmers that hunt put out bales of alfalfa to help the herds when theres a long bad winter, they’d rather do that instead of seeing them die, especially if they hunt that herd and they want to see most of the bucks, does and fawns make it through. It dosen’t have to be the intense cold that Wisconsin and Minnestoa has, its the amount of snow covering thier food source but also the long cold winters that sometimes come with the deep snow. We have alot of nice timbers here, some good sized and in the thousands of acres like in southern and Northeast Iowa but theres thousands of smaller timber around the whole state. Some counties, like in north central Iowa, are high prarie areas and are limited in the amount of timbers they have and also good cover. This happens to be where the most fertile farming ground in iowa is. These counties also don’t have a doe culling program because thier herd is smaller. In most of the other areas in Iowa theres alot of undergrowth to hold deer and thousands of small timbers of 50 to 100 acres and under, down to just a few acres. This will give you an idea just how many deer there are here, most of those smaller timbers have deer in them and if the 10 acres at Joes place dosen’t, Bills 10 acres right next door does. Don’t take a bet with anyone on what small timbers hold a nice buck because you might loose.

If the dnr in both Wisconsin and Minnesota just tried opening up gun season after the rut for a few years this would give the bucks time to spread thier genes around and breed more does and late fawns, some of those late fawns are going to drop bucks. Also if hunters took to mind to let the smaller guys pass by within the next 2 to 3 years they wouldn’t believe what they would start seeing. In the next few years alot of those bucks are going to make it through because now the hunters are seeing more mature bucks and thier willing to wait for a nicer one for the wall. Why shoot the smaller bucks, why not leave them go for a few years and then they would be big and good enough for the wall and then there will be more older mature bucks making it through to show the younger ones how to escape hunting pressure, all this adds to the quality of the herd. 4 and 6 pointers don’t know how to hide from hunters yet, 12’s and 18’s do.

I guess I didn’t realize timing of the hunt would affect herd quality that much. Makes sense though. I would guess the Auto Insurance industry, relies on heavily & lobbies, for the 250,000 deer that get culled every fall in MN.

big g

mossy dan hit on alot of good points I believe the timing of seasons is very important. I think maybe the winters snow cover or hard ice cover has alot to do with it same as for other species such as pheasants. I seen a couple years back(cant remember when now?) we had terrible ice cover and i seen some pheasants that I believe actually i believe died from not being able to eat. My dad and I started dumping corn in the field behind our house everyday you should have seen all the different critters coming around. I have also noticed alot of deer will pick a soy bean field early in the evening versus corn maybe others have noticed this also. I don’t know if many soy beans are grown up your way due to a shorter growing season or not. Maybe someone else can chime in on this and give their opinion.

everyone hunting 2nd season in iowa saturday have a safe and fun time, I live in the timber and theres still some big ones out there

Ive see the same thing in the soybean fields and also the corn fields. By this time when they start scraping for food after it snows the tender smaller limbs or browse on bushes and smaller low to the ground tree limbs are all eaten. You can walk through and area and all the bushes have been trimmed, you can see where they have bitten off the growth they wanted. When thats almost gone they walk into the fields and scrape the ground for soybeans and corn.

Where I hunt alfalfa fields are still green under the snow cover and theres scrapes on the ground everywhere. The alfalfa has been cut the fall befor but theres still enough green alfalfa to eat so the deer can make it through the winter. When the deer are scraping the ground for beans and corn they are finding whats been left from the picker that falls there during picking. Soybeans are very high in proteine and I’ve heard that the dnr here thinks thats one of the (main reasons) why the bucks rack so good, they say thats one of the main sources for good antler growth.

You add together things such as a good food source, selective hunting taking only the bigger bucks that have bred for 4 to 6 years, a later in the season deer hunting season and all this builds a better herd. Like what was said befor theres also alot of road kills here too and the insurance companys agree. Even still, the way the drn manages the herd here that makes it possible for the deer herd to grown into what it can obtain.

Anybody who doesn’t know the letter writers artwork should look him up. I think Michael Sieve is probably one of the best wildlife artists around. His whitetail paintings in particular are awesome. I am guessing he wants some more subjects for his paintings running around. I know that I wouldn’t mind having a few more hog running wild.

So, if Minnesota was managed in the same way as Iowa how much difference would it make? To the average guy out there hunting, the issue isn’t not enough BIG bucks, the issue is ACCESS to them….that is what this state needs to work on. Sure, Iowa has some HUGE bucks, but they come with a HUGE price, too! Minnesota is different in the fact that we have A LOT of hunters, and those hunters want to go home with a deer, thus we are managed as a “numbers” state. One last thing, looking through the various websites and papers such as Outdoor News, and the trail cam photos many of you guys post on here, I would not be so quick to say Minnesota is lacking in the BIG BUCK department….there’s a lot of nice bucks here, just that the access to them is not readily available to the populus as a whole. Just my two cents…

Having hunted MN for years, and Iowa every year I can afford it , here is my $.02.

How many guys here have seen deer on cameras at night? How many big bucks are nocturnal? This means the average hunter will never see the mature deer. There is one time of the year when this changes, the Rut.

We all talk about it, but all the sudden, the woods and fields are alive with more deer then we have seen in months. Bowhunters know it and see it. In MN, now time the vast majority of hunters in the field during this time, when all deer are moving during daylight hours, and are not a wary as in months past.

Hunting in IA, these bucks are already done rutting, and are switching back to nocturnal traveling, and concentrate on feeding again to put back weight they lost during the rut. They are still available, but not like a 15 year old kid at a strip club

I have always thought the mentality of the states is different, but have always thought the timing of the hunt was the largest factor in the buck diffeences between states.

FB

Amen Mr. Sieve and Mossy.
Thanks for posting that letter/email Steve.

Does anyone think driving deer is part of the problem in MN? I don’t know if that is allowed in Iowa or not. I have run into many people after they are done with their deer drive and they had no idea what they were shooting at. I hear comments like ‘I shot and then when I went to get the deer I found it was a 3 point.’ This type of point, shoot, and see what you get hunting is being passed on to their kids so no one is really looking to ‘judge’ the deer before they shoot.

I hope my questions and comments don’t offend anyone. I don’t have a strong opinion on this type of hunting. I think it is necessary to reduce the heard in some areas and this is the best and quickest way to do that…..or many more deer would be jumping in front of cars.

Just my thoughts and looking for input.

Quote:

---

Anybody who doesn’t know the letter writers artwork should look him up. I think Michael Sieve is probably one of the best wildlife artists around.

---

I agree, as an artist myself, I’ve really enjoyed his art. I have more than a few of his prints in my house.

While I enjoy his paintings, I don’t agree wholeheartedly with his stance on this/these issues.

I will say this first and foremost just to get it out of the way. I firmly believe the gun hunters would take a back seat to the bowhunters if Mr. Sieve had his way. There, I said it…

I don’t profess to be an expert with QDM and everything surrounding the theory of it, but I wll offer my thoughts and opinions.

I’m okay with shifting the Gun Deer seasons around. I’m NOT okay with shifting the Buck season past Thanksgiving. If anything, give the Doe hunters what is now the MN Buck Season. A 7 day hunt for strictly Does only. Move the Buck season to the Doe season, make it a 9 day season. That in theory pushes the Buck season out of the “Rut” window. That, I’m “okay” with.

Not that I’ve thoroughly ruffled some feathers, I’ll move on to my next thought.

If he’s worrying about what IA has he should be looking at what they do. What they’ve done is rasie the cost of Non-Res. to the point where a guy like me can’t afford to hunt down there unless I break out a portion of my kid’s college fund. Maybe suggest a price increase for Non-Res. hunters in MN. For the sake of discussion, I’ll suggest doubling it.

Now with that being said, how many of you guys from WI will now hunt MN? Probably half will drop out. That means the guys I saw from WI hunting the Reno Bottoms this year, carting 6pt Bucks and spikes won’t even consider coming back. That’ll help improve the overall ratio of Bucks. But then again, the genetics and quality of food down there is horrible. So does it make a difference? Maybe not in that area.

My point is, will someone who’s looking at forking over close to $300 for a Lic. do it? Probably not. I’ve sold many, I stress MANY Deer Lic. in MN. Lots of them to Non-Res. folks. Quite a few of them who I’ve spoken to have or have had the mentality of “I’m paying a lot for this Lic. so I intend on filling it.” Whether that’s a monster buck or a spike, they are going to fill that tag. I’d wager those guys who already feel the pinch from the Lic. won’t buy a $300 tag.

That door sings both ways. I wouldn’t spend $300 to hunt the 100’s of acres I have access to in WI. I’m just ‘Joe Average Deer Hunter.’

Lastly, I just have a hard time wondering why we need to involve the MN Deer Biologists when according to Mr. Sieve “The genetics of our deer herd is just as strong as are Iowa’s. The deer population here in Minnesota is several times larger than is Iowa. And we have far more habitat and far better habitat here than they do there.”

Seems to me MN & WI need to manage the hunters, not the Deer. Just like IA has.

I agree wholeheartedly Blue The thing that needs to change for Mr. Sieve’s liking, would be the young bucks being given a chance to mature. That relies on everybody, not pullin’ the trigger on everything that walks by. You can’t point the finger at the DNR deer management for that

big g

I agree Fleck, I think liscenses cost too much for an out of stater to come here and hunt too. Its not the amount of deer that thier concerned about them harvesting, thats figured into the field counts and harvests that include all hunters, local and out of state. Moving back the gun season is the answer to me. I know for a fact that theres very nice bucks in Wisc. and Minn. its just the frame of mind that because I bought a liscense im going to put meat on the table no matter what it is. Im sure things would turn for the worse here if we had an early any sex season and the main season was befor the November and December ruts. Your idea of an early doe season is a good one and then moving back the main season some too would help. It would be interisting to see what would happen if both states moved thier doe and main seasons around.

I like WI’s seasons, and we seem to have plenty of both quantity and quality of deer.

Big G and Blue, I think the point Mr. Sieve is trying to make is. If our MN bucks didn’t have people gun hunting during the rut. The number of bucks surviving each year would increase. I don’t believe he’s talking about hunters needing to check themselves and pass on younger bucks.
Having a gun season during prime rut when all age class bucks are on there feet and moving at all times of the day results in more bucks seen and killed, period. If you have a gun season that’s after the rut, when bucks aren’t moving at all times of the day, less bucks seen, less bucks killed. Utimately leading to bucks having a better chance at surviving each year. There’s no doubt the genetics are here, but the age class isn’t.
I’ve read in past articles that the buck mortality rate in MN is less then a year old. If you’re after big bucks, thats a tough statistic to swallow.

I’d love it every hunter out there passed on young bucks, is it realistic, heck no, unless the state starts selling trophy only tags with 130 inch minums and 3.5 year old minums. That would never fly.

WI gun season starts the Saturday before Thanksgiving. Iowa’s is the firts weekend in Dec. Illinoise is the Saturday before Thanksgiving. Kansas, first weekend in Dec. These big buck states all have later guns season and have less days in the woods with guns too.

Could we as hunters do a better job, yes. Could the State of MN make some changes to help the situation, yes. Will it ever happen, I doubt it.

JMHO
Don’t want to ruffle too many feathers either.

I completely understand where you and Mr. Sieve are coming from. That’s why I talked about switching the seasons around. My post wasn’t so much about checking one’s self but the difference between what IA does compared to MN & WI. Primarily the rate of licensing for out-of-state hunters.

I think you’d see a depleted IA Deer herd if their Lic. cost the same as MN or WI. I’ve had plenty of invites to hunt IA, but I can’t afford it. Especially now with gas and such. I think there are a lot of hunters who fall into that category.

Quote:

---

Could we as hunters do a better job, yes. Could the State of MN make some changes to help the situation, yes. Will it ever happen, I doubt it.

---

I doubt it’ll ever change too. There’s way too much leveraging from the Insurance Companies and an incredible amount of dollars to be lost from any kind of change.

I’d be very happy to hunt the MN Buck season during the same time as the WI season. I’d see a lot fewer Non-Res. hunters on the public land I hunt.

I am selfish that way.

I disagree, If Iowa dropped there prices to a more affordable price it wouldn’t make one bit of difference. The NR license is by lottery, they decide how many NR’s get tags. We use to get tags every other year, now its every 3 years. Everybody wants a big Iowa buck.
Look at how much money the State of Iowa brings in, just because they got big bucks. Thousands of NR hunters pay up front, full price to put in Iowa’s lottery. And I wonder how much the state makes on interest alone before they FINALLY send you your reimbursement check in the mail.
Makes you wonder, if MN could pull off something similar if the State managed the heard for bigger bucks. You may lose some resident license sales by changing the seasons, but how much could we gain with NR’s if there were the oppurtunities to take a big buck like there are in IA, IL, KS, WI.
I don’t have those answers, but it makes you think.

The lottery…..dang, I forgot about that. I was thinking the lic. system was the same. Yes, with the lottery the way it’s set up, it does favor the Deer.

Quote:

---

Makes you wonder, if MN could pull off something similar if the State managed the heard for bigger bucks.

---

I think MN could pull something off like that. However, the inital loss in terms of dollars would be huge and I’m not so sure the MN Gov’t would be willing to swallow that pill. Especially given how long it takes to grow a good crop of big Bucks. Long term, the gains would be there.

Quote:

---

You may lose some resident license sales by changing the seasons…

---

You might be surprised by that. Switching the seasons by a couple weeks may not hurt as much as it does on paper.

Yes, it does make you think.

Here are my thoughts. First off, if I am not mistaken, Minnesota charges non resident hunters exactly what we would be charged in that state. In other words, if it costs me 136 bucks to hunt Pennsylvania as a MN resident, it cost a PA resident 136 bucks to hunt MN. This may differ a little bit in Iowa where they force you to buy both a doe tag and a buck tag but it is still a bit more than people realize. Perhaps they are only charged what we get for the buck portion of the license?? That said, I would be all for a higher non resident license.

Also, we all know that deer, namely big bucks, are most vulnerable during the rut. We also know that is far easier to kill a buck by way of a gun. Moving the gun season back at least two weeks would help bucks grow larger and live longer. These deer would grow big for gun and bow hunters alike. I am not sure how someone thinks a bow hunter would “corner the market”. Furthermore, I think we have an incredible amount of time to bag a buck with a gun. with a muzzeloader, coupled with the traditional gun seasons, I think you can hunt a month or longer with the ability to throw some lead around. I know gun hunters have complained about the length of bow seasons……why not pick up a bow and hunt?
I think we can get the bucks we want by doing a couple of things. I wouldn’t be against an earn a buck program. Why not make all non residents tag a doe first? For that matter, I wouldn’t be against having to do that myself as a resident. Perhaps all residents could be given the chance to bag a buck with a tweak or two. How about making residents earn a buck every other year? I have never really heard of a program like that for residents but I am all for our state producing larger bucks. I too hunted Iowa with my Father this year. I have hunted MN, WI, IA, PA and Saskatchewan. I am familiar with NY as well. By far my best hunt took place in Iowa. My Father would say the same I beleive. I am all for other suggestions but I would start by moving the gun season out of the rut. I would recommend some sort of earn a buck program for non residents at least. I also would not be completely opposed to a 3 or 4 point on one side minimum. I would have this rule for adult hunters only though. I think it decreases the amount times people shoot at running deer. This allows bucks to get bigger. It makes for a safer hunt for everyone as well. Any other ideas?

Quote:

---

Here are my thoughts. First off, if I am not mistaken, Minnesota charges non resident hunters exactly what we would be charged in that state. In other words, if it costs me 136 bucks to hunt Pennsylvania as a MN resident, it cost a PA resident 136 bucks to hunt MN.

---

A non resident license cost $141 in Minnesota regardless of what state you are from.

Quote:

---

Here are my thoughts. First off, if I am not mistaken, Minnesota charges non resident hunters exactly what we would be charged in that state. In other words, if it costs me 136 bucks to hunt Pennsylvania as a MN resident, it cost a PA resident 136 bucks to hunt MN. This may differ a little bit in Iowa where they force you to buy both a doe tag and a buck tag but it is still a bit more than people realize. Perhaps they are only charged what we get for the buck portion of the license?? That said, I would be all for a higher non resident license.

Also, we all know that deer, namely big bucks, are most vulnerable during the rut. We also know that is far easier to kill a buck by way of a gun. Moving the gun season back at least two weeks would help bucks grow larger and live longer. These deer would grow big for gun and bow hunters alike. I am not sure how someone thinks a bow hunter would “corner the market”. Furthermore, I think we have an incredible amount of time to bag a buck with a gun. with a muzzeloader, coupled with the traditional gun seasons, I think you can hunt a month or longer with the ability to throw some lead around. I know gun hunters have complained about the length of bow seasons……why not pick up a bow and hunt?
I think we can get the bucks we want by doing a couple of things. I wouldn’t be against an earn a buck program. Why not make all non residents tag a doe first? For that matter, I wouldn’t be against having to do that myself as a resident. Perhaps all residents could be given the chance to bag a buck with a tweak or two. How about making residents earn a buck every other year? I have never really heard of a program like that for residents but I am all for our state producing larger bucks. I too hunted Iowa with my Father this year. I have hunted MN, WI, IA, PA and Saskatchewan. I am familiar with NY as well. By far my best hunt took place in Iowa. My Father would say the same I beleive. I am all for other suggestions but I would start by moving the gun season out of the rut. I would recommend some sort of earn a buck program for non residents at least. I also would not be completely opposed to a 3 or 4 point on one side minimum. I would have this rule for adult hunters only though. I think it decreases the amount times people shoot at running deer. This allows bucks to get bigger. It makes for a safer hunt for everyone as well. Any other ideas?

---

I think having one set of rules for residents and one for non-residents (IE earn-a-buck) is not a good idea. Earn a buck is a good idea in areas with out of whack buck-doe ratios, but is that the case throughout Minnesota? I do like how WI does it where you shoot a doe in 2007 for a 2008 EAB sticker.

The antler point rule I am just against in any state. I just feel if people have a tag they can take whatever they like as long as it is sound for managment of the population. Antler point rules, IMO, blurr or cross the line from Quality deer management to trophy deer management.

I don’t bow hunt, I do gun hunt, but I don’t have a problem with not being able to gun hunt the peak of the rut. Would Minnesota really have a huge public outcry with elimination of the first season?

I do think if MN ran it’s gun deer season the same time as WI you would see a decrease in NR hunters from WI.

I could be wrong…I said the 136 figure as I believe the extra 5 bucks goes to deer donation program. My Fathe rpaid 141 this year (from PA)Either way, I wouldn’t be against raising the price. Thanks for the info. Is it possible that we had a reciprocal fee in the last few years???

Quote:

---

Would Minnesota really have a huge public outcry with elimination of the first season?

---

More than likely yes. That answer comes from what I see in the area(s) I hunt.

Quote:

---

I do think if MN ran it’s gun deer season the same time as WI you would see a decrease in NR hunters from WI.

---

Yes, very much so.

I have said before and will say again

MN can offset the expense of switching seasons and offset the moneys lost to nonresidents by INCREASING THE FISHING LICENSE Fees. Take advantage of our biggest draw and let the nonresidents pick up the tab. They rape and pillage us on Deer licenses, turn about is fair play

And for reference, if you get a group of guys who want to hunt IA, you all apply every year, some will be drawn for buck tags, some will not. Those that do not can then reapply for a doe tag, where the vast majority will be drawn. Group hunts can then be done until the buck tags are used up. Not the most ethical situation, but easily done.

Not meant to ruffle feathers here, just my $.02.

They did try that , I think a couple years ago. Then they said it was illegal or immoral, I can’t recall. But yes, they did try reciprical fees a while ago. I will see what I can dig up. If Wisc and Mn held their Rifle/shotgun seasons at the same time, it would cut down on number of NR hunters on both sides of the river. Maybe that is why they do not change, revenue and deer populations…. hmmmm…. bottom line, do not shoot little bucks, if you want to see big bucks. I do it, I could of had many little bucks by now this year, but I will not. Not to say, somebody hunting for meat cannot shoot whatever they want, thats just me. As long as you are within the laws, shoot what you will be happy with Some hunters don’t like horn stew…

big g

They did still have reciprocal fees for non-resident archey license, up until this year. Whatever your state charged, or $135, whichever was greater. they repealed it because with the ELS stations it was too hard to administer. No other fees are/were reciprocal.

big g

Quote:

---

MN can offset the expense of switching seasons and offset the moneys lost to nonresidents by INCREASING THE FISHING LICENSE Fees.

---

That’s not too fair to the people who fish but don’t hunt. Why should fishermen suffer the hunters?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

MN can offset the expense of switching seasons and offset the moneys lost to nonresidents by INCREASING THE FISHING LICENSE Fees.

---

That’s not too fair to the people who fish but don’t hunt. Why should fishermen suffer the hunters?

---

It is taking advantage of both states most valuable assets. Is it fair for Iowans, no, but no worse then what they are doing to Minnesotans now.

And when they did charge the reciprical fees for bowhunters, I thought the world was going to end with the guys I know in IA. MN problably gets more fisherman from IA then IA gets MN hunters, so to offset costs, it would only have to be about $150 or something like that to break even. But then I guess we could follow IA and force you to buy conservation stamps, small game licenses, and all the other crap that goes along with it. Then we can say our license is not that expensive, just all the other fees tacked on.

I guess it comes down to whose dog you want to kick. I hate that it is mine, but if I was an IA, I would think it was a good deal. Not in my back yard

Blue, if you wanna cry about fishing, go to the other site. This is a HUNTING site.

Seriously though,I think the posters reasoning/thinking behind it is: Hit ’em where it hurts. Iowa is a big attraction for hunters. On the flip side Minnesotat is a big attraction to Fisherman. Just taking a guess, but this is the way I saw it.