Thoughts and Opinions

With many states firearm seasons over or under way, the internet is filled with links to the Harvest Reports, and the numbers. Some states are up some are down, but that’s not what I cared about as I noticed the comments on these reports. Specifically as I read the preliminary first season harvest report for IL on Facebook, the number of comments that mistrust and accuse the DNR of lying about numbers is staggering. Am I the only one who realizes that when you buy a tag it’s put into the numbers, when you register a deer it’s put into the numbers. The DNR doesn’t just come up with these numbers willy-nilly. All too often people base the number of deer that are in the whole state on what they saw, and “I heard way fewer shots than I ever have before.” It really troubles me that hunters mistrust the numbers the DNR put out regardless of the state and assume because their season did not go well the DNR is lying about harvest reports. That sort of mindset does not take anything into consideration, like that the northern counties of IL, and southern parts of WI had 12-16in of snow for opening weekend. (Ya, think that may have slowed some hunters, and deer? I would say so)

The second thought that struck me as I read the comments as well as just around the hunting and anti-hunting world in general is the blame on trophy or sport hunters for the “ruined” populations. All too often I see posts of, “I only hunt to feed my family, etc.” And that assumes any “trophy” hunter is ruining the hunting world. These comments and individuals are starting to annoy me.
1. Subsistence hunting is not required any more. So to claim you hunt to feed your family, and that’s the only reason is blatantly ignoring the fact that you enjoy the time you spend in the woods. If your hunting to feed your family as your only reason, and claim that as such, obviously you should probably sell the $500 dollar rifle, and truck and all the hunting clothes you have because you need the money to go to the grocery store and by some food.
2. Obviously you enjoying hunting. That means you enjoy the sport of hunting, because that’s what hunting is so to claim hunting for food only, and ignore the fact that your time in the woods is enjoyable and fun is blatantly ignoring the sport of it that exists no matter the goal in your hunt.
3. If you harvest a deer (or other animal) it’s your trophy. Obviously you don’t shoot an animal that you would be completely ashamed to harvest. I have never once heard of someone who was completely ashamed of an animal they harvested. whether its a yearling doe, or the 8 1/2yr old buck you have had pictures of forever. If you are ever completely ashamed of an animal you harvest you probably should have never pulled the trigger. So to hunt for food only, and then have the photo memories, or the rack euro mounted or whatever blatantly ignores the pride in your trophy no matter the size.

Ted Nugent said it once, that you can not deer hunt without having sport, meat and a trophy. I would have to say he definitely hit the nail on the head with that. You hunt for the enjoyment of hunting, you harvest an animal that your proud of regardless of size, and every deer produces meat that is utilized by either your family or a family in need when donated. So for either side, the proclaimed trophy hunters or the meat hunters, neither can blame the other for anything. Nor should any claim the practices of one is superior to the others because at the end of the day they, meaning WE, both deer hunt for the same reason. The enjoyment of the hunt, the harvest memories of our personal trophy, and the meat we are able to put in our freezer or give to the less fortunate.

1. I don’t know how il. Estimates the heard. In Wi, they utilize a lot from the harvest rate. So, to visually see this, let’s pretend I pass around to every IDO member a candy jar that is filled to the top. Everyone can take as much as they can fit into your hand. So everyone starting with “A” gets all they want. Some take a huge handful, others take 1 piece. Everyone is happy. Next are the B’s, they don’t see as much candy, but the final results are the same.

This trend continues…until we get a few more letters down….then the crash. A few people got some…and the jar is empty. Now everyone is passed at me. I should have only allowed 1 piece per person. Never should have let people be responsible for themselves….

I like your last paragraph. Didn’t care for very much said above it though, mostly because of the rambling; which is hard to comment on so many different opinionated statements.

But I’m with you on the last section.

I also just gave up caring and quit listening to such deer discussions and honestly prefer to simply chase fish that are rarely fished for, in many cases rarely discussed and very rarely harvested.
Life is just so much simpler for me now. No care about walleyes, no care about deer, no care about politics; pretty much avoiding such continuous and repetitive arguments. Hell I don’t even care about boat wakes. Just learned to accept it all and think about something else. Easy to get hot when passionate about such things out of your control.

That’s my opinion. And my ramble.

Can I ask a stupid question?

Why is a deer a resource for two months of the year and a nuisance for 10 months?

biggill wrote:

Can I ask a stupid question?

Why is a deer a resource for two months of the year and a nuisance for 10 months?

Insurance claims

Apologies for it being so rant like, I guess what I mean by it is mostly that I really don’t understand the complete lack of trust in the DNR, maybe it’s because I’m in that field of study right now and am learning about the Naturual Resources constantly in college at UWSP. Anyway, I’m glad some agreed with my final statements and I apologize for its difficult to respond to rant like style.

I am on the same page as FBRM. But here’s a little expansion from my perspective. Why and how I hunt is my business. As long as I am within the letter of the law and legal, its no body else’s business. I don’t expound on why or how you hunt. You should focus on how hunting affects you and why you hunt the way you do. You’ll be a better hunter in the long run.

My personal distrust from the Mn DNR originates mostly from the lack of management on the fisheries side. However, this has now trickled over into the decimation of the MN moose population by wolves.

In the case of elk, the federal government imposed illegal importation of an invasive species in several states from Michigan to Utah. Those states should have stood up to the Feds. Let’s look at Yellowstone for example, hunters at one point had supported conservation efforts to grow the elk population to the 20k+ as recent as 1994 and now the counts are under 4K.

In our backyard, the Mn moose population has went from over 10K in the early 2000’s to less than 3500. This whole time, what hunters have known, the wolves are a primary reason the moose have declined so rapidly. It’s taken the DNR far to long to get on board with this reasoning. Instead we’ve been reminded frequently they just don’t know.

I’ll reference the recent deer fiasco in WI. Earn a buck and the mythical CWD scare. Were the deer populations too high? I wonder how much money the insurance lobby pumped into the WI government those years?? Heck they pulled the same scam down in the SE region of Mn.

I think if I spent a little more time, I could think of a couple more examples I’ve personally witnessed since moving to MN in 2000. Not saying the DNR is bad. I truly believe the folks in the field are good people doing good things for our renewable resources. I think the problem is the layer of politics above that manage their budgets and what is publicized to the average Joe like us. So, needless to say, I’m skeptical of the DNR. I wish I didn’t have reason to be.

I think is an interesting topic and it would be interesting to see the DNR do surveys of the public’s trust in their ability to manage the resources within their state.

I don’t mean to disagree but the Yellowstone example is not really what I would call a mismanagement story. Yes the elk numbers have gone down and they have also reverted back to their normal habitat patterns,but the overall health of that ecosystem after wolves were brought back in is much higher than it was before. Elk had browsed and degraded their own habitat to the point that they required hay feedings in the winter. Wolves brought balance back into that ecosystem and is really a success story for most wildlife and ecosystem standpoint.

Look into several of the documentaries about the Wolves of Yellowstone.

Recently I have had the chance to listen to a USFWS special agent who spent much of his career in Wi. Investigating wolf issues. From his words there is no species more intensively monitored than the wolf numbers, if the sportsman of Wi had accepted the population rebound and claimed the credit rather than instantly wishing death on them they would already be off the endangered list. But because they were so openly hated by people the anti-hunters and animal rights groups have been able to fight the delisting.

Nothing wrong with disagreeing and having good back and forth. I figure you may not change my opinion but I just might learn something if I don’t dig my heals in and immediately dismiss your stance just because I don’t agree with it.

If you can find those documentaries on Yellowstone, I’d like to see them. They are contrary to everything I’ve read to this point.

As for hatred for wolves, this is been going on since man settled here. I think it’s short sighted to blame sportsman for the relisting. Look at how much Mn alone pays out in livestock damage each year. When a species starts messing with people’s livelihoods, you will spawn hate quickly.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q this is one of the brief looks at it

This is a bit longer.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/wolves-greenthumbs-yellowstone/

If you want evidence of mistrust in our Minnesota DNR read any on-line discussion of the fish situation here at Mille Lacs Lake.