DNR, Dynamite and Deer Stands

Oooh now do walk in access.

Oh boy! now someone created a burner account to back CaptainMusky. This is a good thread.
DT

Anyfish2 wrote:

Finny, it is not illegal to have “permanent” deer stand in a State forest. You cannot build permanent buildings but stands are legal.

There many un-designated (Not WMA,SNA, ect..)state lands in MN. Permanent stands are legal there.

Cass county has been illegal to build for decades, but legal to occupy/use existing permanent stands.

Words matter, you should read them.

Also CaptainMusky, HAS said multiple times “where legal” and clearly said “many counties” where tax forfeit is open game!

Words Matter, read them!

That is not what I found regarding building permanent stands on state land. Care to site your source. I certainly could be wrong.

deertracker wrote:

Oh boy! now someone created a burner account to back CaptainMusky. This is a good thread.
DT

I was kinda thinking the same.

Oh boy, this is going to be fun! First time in a forum since FishingMinnesota died!

Finn, Mn hunting regulation pg 117,

This was from 2015, there has been no statutes added since then on the legality of such stands that i can find.
Minnesota law prohibits building deer stands with roofs and walls on state land. Simple platforms without walls or roofs are not considered a structure. If forestry or enforcement officials find an enclosed stand on state land, they typically tag the structure, notifying the builder that it must be removed.

I dont care who posts what! I will call people out, whom use a persons words out of context, and people that change a persons words to fit their agenda. It is lazy and misleading.

I now hunt my own private land, but I have hunted Cass County State Forest land and tax Fortieted land since I started hunting in 1991 until 2020, when I bought my own. I pride myself on knowing the regulations the best I can. And for your information we used hang on stands since about 1999. it was easier than keeping up with our platforms. never had a box blind on public and feel there is no place for a box blind on public land in my opinion.

deertracker wrote:

Oh boy! now someone created a burner account to back CaptainMusky. This is a good thread.
DT

It’s NOT me who created it LOL. I don’t need help but thanks anyfish.

CaptainMusky wrote:

It’s NOT me who created it LOL. I don’t need help but thanks anyfish.

Sure you didn’t Capt. or anyfish.

Oh and were are our manners, welcome to the forum Anyfish assuming your not an imposter.

This is a prime example of what you can expect from us, were a goofy bunch.

And you sir are wrong. This section isn’t about “state lands” its about “State Forests” and throughout that specific part of the regs it divides out all the different types of state lands including things like WIA, Refuges, and Forests, but does not mention tax forfeiture land at all. Remember words matter read them ALL and not just take them out of context.

Tax forfeiture lands are owned in trust by the State of MN and allocated to the local government to administer them as they see fit. The rules on how a local government can use them is 53 pages long. I doubt anything I said will convince people to read those rules or discontinue their dumbassery.

Riverrat wrote:

And you sir are wrong. This section isn’t about “state lands” its about “State Forests” and throughout that specific part of the regs it divides out all the different types of state lands including things like WIA, Refuges, and Forests, but does not mention tax forfeiture land at all. Remember words matter read them ALL and not just take them out of context.

Tax forfeiture lands are owned in trust by the State of MN and allocated to the local government to administer them as they see fit. The rules on how a local government can use them is 53 pages long. I doubt anything I said will convince people to read those rules or discontinue their dumbassery.

Did I not say STATE FOREST? My first ever post? yes I am right!

My only mention is of Cass County Tax Forfeit. Even the DNR reg book on Pg. 126, mentions Cass county Managed forest lands (which the tax Forteit falls under). It states the current rules.

I have some how become a dumba$$ for reading the rules?

The problem is “state lands” encompass many different designations. The statement of permanent stands be unlawfull on state lands is inaccurate or down right wrong. The State Forest was an easy example of it being wrong, that is why I used it.

John Rasmussen wrote:

Oh and were are our manners, welcome to the forum Anyfish assuming your not an imposter.

This is a prime example of what you can expect from us, were a goofy bunch.

Not an imposter, just a guy that has been reading IDO for years and finally wanted to jump in.
My name is Brian, and i am from Randall Mn. if ya want to know.

I was part of FM and HSO back in its hay day until it died. I know how forums work and looking forward to it. And I am generally not an antagonizer.

thanks for the welcome

Anyfish is definitely captainmusky based on his posts. And he definitely still doesn’t know what he is talking about.

The direction this went is wild

CaptainMusky wrote:

Yeah it may have changed and I haven’t looked lately to check. It doesn’t apply to me. My buddies groups stands have all been there for decades and they merely replace boards etc. They haven’t built a new one in eons. Having said that the last several years have been very bad for them. No deer! Wolves and cougars are taking care of them.

Just curious if the MDNR has the same “scientific” response as the WDNR on the lack of deer in the northern part of both states. Wisconsin’s is that wolves have a very minimal impact on the deer population. The major issue causing the deer population being down is the multiple “severe” winters.

FinnyDinDin wrote:

Anyfish is definitely captainmusky based on his posts. And he definitely still doesn’t know what he is talking about.

My names not Brian and I don’t live in Randall. POP can attest to that.
The point here is that there are tons of types of public lands and they are not all treated the same. State forest, national forest, tax forfeited. Tax for forfeited is county owned land and they decide how and what rules apply.

MX1825 wrote:

Just curious if the MDNR has the same “scientific” response as the WDNR on the lack of deer in the northern part of both states. Wisconsin’s is that wolves have a very minimal impact on the deer population. The major issue causing the deer population being down is the multiple “severe” winters.

winters have certainly played a role for sure. This year it was hopefully better for them and they could escape predators and hopefully many twins or triplets are born this year. We need it.

I’m sure winters have something to do with the deer herd population decline, but we had severe winters 30 years ago and still had tons of deer. The decline chart started to fall off a cliff when the wolf population went up and the DNR handed out doe tags like they were penny candy at a parade. JMO

And the DNR is too proud or arrogant to admit their mistakes.

MX1825 wrote:

I’m sure winters have something to do with the deer herd population decline, but we had severe winters 30 years ago and still had tons of deer. The decline chart started to fall off a cliff when the wolf population went up and the DNR handed out doe tags like they were penny candy at a parade. JMO

Yep