Post by kl9 on Aug 24, 2017 8:13:07 GMT -6
I attended the Houston meeting last night for the proposed late antlerless hunt. To my surprise there were a lot of folks there that were in favor of the hunt as well as frustrated with the amount of deer damage they have been experiencing (farmers). What I found interesting/good was that a lot of these same folks were also big buck hunters… they just want less deer due to damage. That wasn’t always the case… there were 2-3 that sounded like the just hated deer. What I took away from this meeting primarily was that people in SE MN are smart – they DO NOT trust the DNR. Multiple people stated this (angry farmers and hunters alike). I think people in the area do want trophy hunting and good hunting, but they just want less does as well.
One thing that pissed me off was Murkowski tried to make the pitch that this would actually help grow bigger bucks because there would be less does and less competition in the herd. This assumes that food is a limiting factor which it is NOT EVEN CLOSE to being in SE MN. I called him out on this. He mentioned proper herd balance to facilitate B&C caliber bucks. I pointed towards the fact that Buffalo Co, WI has had 40-50 DPSM for decades and they are the number one B&C county in the nation.
I also called him out on the fact that the last population estimate (listed on the MN DNR website from 2015) states that DPA 349 was at 20 DSPM in 2015, yet the chart they showed everyone there stated it was around 35 DPSM in 2015. I didn’t get much of a reply on this as I asked multiple questions in one instance. I do believe they flew a lot of 349 when they did the flying for the CWD zone so there could be adjustment there.
Other than that I think Murk did a pretty good job. I just think the population goal of 15-19 (pre-fawn) DPSM needs to be adjusted upward for our area. Last planning on this was 2013 and if it happened again my assumption would be more people would be in favor of slightly raising the density target. I have an acquaintance going to the St. Paul meeting tonight and I’ve filled him in on what to expect. I really hope he brings up the discrepancy in estimated DPSM of the area.
One thing that pissed me off was Murkowski tried to make the pitch that this would actually help grow bigger bucks because there would be less does and less competition in the herd. This assumes that food is a limiting factor which it is NOT EVEN CLOSE to being in SE MN. I called him out on this. He mentioned proper herd balance to facilitate B&C caliber bucks. I pointed towards the fact that Buffalo Co, WI has had 40-50 DPSM for decades and they are the number one B&C county in the nation.
I also called him out on the fact that the last population estimate (listed on the MN DNR website from 2015) states that DPA 349 was at 20 DSPM in 2015, yet the chart they showed everyone there stated it was around 35 DPSM in 2015. I didn’t get much of a reply on this as I asked multiple questions in one instance. I do believe they flew a lot of 349 when they did the flying for the CWD zone so there could be adjustment there.
Other than that I think Murk did a pretty good job. I just think the population goal of 15-19 (pre-fawn) DPSM needs to be adjusted upward for our area. Last planning on this was 2013 and if it happened again my assumption would be more people would be in favor of slightly raising the density target. I have an acquaintance going to the St. Paul meeting tonight and I’ve filled him in on what to expect. I really hope he brings up the discrepancy in estimated DPSM of the area.
