No excuse Walleye, just the way it "used" to be. I stand corrected, thank you.

Osky

Guy on tman claims they see them in se MN, on ia border

A few years ago a kid over in Lafayette county (in the southern tier of Wisconsin) got his butt in a sling for shooting a wolf while deer hunting. There was no reason for him to believe that it was anything other than a big coyote since we don't have wolves this far south.

You would move south too if on a deer diet. They ate them all in the north

(This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) they're moving south, and in the south they're moving them north. Been trying to get them reestablished here in NM for years, Mexican Grey wolf that is. Probably half way between a large coyote and a timber wolf. No trapping seasons though, and all introduced animals, initially, that depended on humans for food. Interesting first few years, but ranchers still suffer cause cattle are easier to catch than elk, and probably more plentiful. Don't get me wrong, I do not hate the wolf, just wish I could trap one, and that the government was more understanding on their management. But hey, you put government in any sentence and it gets Fd up. hahahaha!!

soon there wil be no reason for hunters to control the deer population . no need for deer season

I would argue in the last perhaps 80 years the major influence in creating hunters was the experience of deer camp with dad and grandpa and that first (probably) doe that came with it. With out deer or with a limited supply of deer that become increasingly more available to the more privileged, we won't need many more gun owners will we?

Osky

No problem Osky, just keeping it fact based. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of DNR bashing material left without the old spearing ban mess.

That's all true. Kids, especially these days, like to be entertained. Sitting in a deer stand, freezing, without seeing deer isn't going to recruit hunters or gun owners for that matter. And it's not just kids, adults that normally aren't so outdoor minded like seeing and shooting a deer too, and we are losing some of them. And it's all pure crap that wolves don't have an impact on deer and moose. You will never convince me of that because I've seen the evidence in my own hunting area and many others that I trust have said the same thing about their hunting areas. This year was the first time in years I actually saw a fawn.

And I think it goes deeper than that.
I don't know how it is in Mn. But a whole lot of northern Wi seems to be for sale. Not all due to low deer populations but it sure doesn't help. The domino effect of exactly what your talking about^^^

We have pretty much the same situation in Wisconsin Goldy. What I do not understand is that deer hunters are a major funding for our DNR. 600,000
licenses at 20 bucks or so a pop is serious money. Less deer sure does not help and the numbers of hunters continues to dwindle. Wolves in the north and CWD wholesale slaughter in the south has been less than popular with most folks I know.

Zim

Deer hunters/hunting is only one of the DNRs concern when it comes to the deer herd.
I pity the DNR, they have it rough.
True fact when I say that there are too many deer. The effect of too many deer on an environment is easy to prove. I know many hunters will disagree, but again, studies do show this. I see it in my own small 20 some acre chunk of land.

I don't live too far from Hatchetman, I see lots of fawns every year. Almost always its a pair of fawns and a does. I see deer regularly from my house. Had a herd working thru the woodlot a couple of weeks ago that I lost count of at 13.

Hunters desire for more deer is a benefit to only one group and detriment to many others.

DNR has to balance what the deer hunts want, a deer behind every bush, vs what the rest of the population which includes farmers, Auto Ins Co.s, land owners and foresters that are working for lumber crops and just ordinary citizens interested in the environment want. More and more municipalities in SE WI are having discussion on how to deal with the over population of deer inside of towns/cities.

I have often wonder if a wolf population in the southern 1/2 of WI would be acceptable. Because in the end it'll be the politics of it that decides, not the wolves. Sooner or later the wolves will arrive. There is plenty of food. Right now my guess is that as long as wolves stick to deer and the occasional livestock they will be welcomed by enough so that they will be allow to remain.

I'm not so sure I have ever run into a hunter who told me he wanted a "deer behind every bush."
It would seem you live in a pretty special area. In the northern third of Minnesota those selfish deer hunters make a huge contribution locally to the economy. Particularly for an area in which the major historical incomes were mining and logging. Both of which are under fire and diminishing at an accelerated rate. Wether it is the non homestead taxes they pay on lands, leases, business brought to resorts, towns, establishments, fuel, service providers... The list goes on and on, some call it trickle down.
The deer hunters are arguably the largest outdoors group utilizing the harvestable resources up here, tell them they and their expenditures are no longer of any valu, and that sure makes the very small trapping community and other outdoors groups like us easy targets for elimination as well.
Your area is conducive to supporting natural large deer populations, just as the southern agricultural areas of Minnesota are. The northern 1/3 of Minnesota is not. The deer were not native here. They came with the destruction of large forests. They have become very important to us, one out of control apex predator or combination of predators, destructive winters which are always looming, among other things can seriously hurt a lot of people.

Osky

[/quote]


I'm not so sure I have ever run into a hunter who told me he wanted a "deer behind every bush."
It would seem you live in a pretty special area. In the northern third of Minnesota those selfish deer hunters make a huge contribution locally to the economy. Particularly for an area in which the major historical incomes were mining and logging. Both of which are under fire and diminishing at an accelerated rate. Wether it is the non homestead taxes they pay on lands, leases, business brought to resorts, towns, establishments, fuel, service providers... The list goes on and on, some call it trickle down.
The deer hunters are arguably the largest outdoors group utilizing the harvestable resources up here, tell them they and their expenditures are no longer of any valu, and that sure makes the very small trapping community and other outdoors groups like us easy targets for elimination as well.
Your area is conducive to supporting natural large deer populations, just as the southern agricultural areas of Minnesota are. The northern 1/3 of Minnesota is not. The deer were not native here. They came with the destruction of large forests. They have become very important to us, one out of control apex predator or combination of predators, destructive winters which are always looming, among other things can seriously hurt a lot of people.

Osky
[/quote]

I'm sure you get the point behind my comment of a deer behind every bush.
I have never heard a deer hunter say there are too many deer. Unless they have some perspective from another discipline.

Where I live is rural and the vast majority of the property is private owned. Deer hunting is not the event it is in N. Wi and I assume N MN. If the land is hunted its by the owner or good friends/relatives. There maybe some rental/leasing going on but its very limited as most the parcels are not much over 40 acres. I imagine the southern MN is very similar. There is an over abundance of deer here. I would argue that there is an overabundance of deer in N. WI as well. Deer hunters would disagree. How does a deer hunter determine if there is enough deer? By how many he sees. Not a very scientific study. While a farmer can point to ruined crops, a Ins. Co. can state occurrence of Auto/Deer collisions, a Forester can point to lack of regeneration of trees that deer favor as food and thus future income from the harvesting of his trees. And I as a property owner concerned about the health of my forest I can point to the elimination of many indigenous forbs and lack of Oak regeneration due to deer over browsing. Many studies of these very things. The really important ones are the studies of the damage that deer browse does to the forest/environment.

The income that deer hunting generates is really irrelevant to the subject of is there too many deer or not enough deer. If you want use that a justification for having a heavier deer herd then I think all the people that are harmed financially by that herd should be heard also. Deer gun season in WI is just 9 days. Lots of income generated in those 9 days. But the rest of the year everybody else is paying for that heavier herd. Don't think the DNR does not hear from those other voices.

What would you have the DNR do? To increase the deer herd you'll have to do some logging to ensure lots of new growth, if there is no market for the timber thats a big waste to cut trees just to make feed for deer. Not to mention the cost. The amount of forestry activity is key to deer habitat in the North. Without logging the forest will eventually revert back to a old growth/climax forest which supports very little deer. Can't do anything about the winters and the DNR has its hands tied right now as far as wolves go.

The deer hunting and income for your area reminds me of the Lake Michigan fishery situation. The habitat will only support what it will. Doesn't matter who makes how much off deer hunting or charter boat fishing, until something changes the deer/fish populations will not increase much at all.

Facts about managed wolf control are ignored by the "scientists" in MN it seems. Here in MT we have a wolf season, hunting and trapping. Still plenty of wolves, far less conflict with livestock and by some miracle the elk north of the park are coming back now. The idiots are now fighting our grizz season...well what should have been our grizz season. Commissioner Vermillion (D) chickened out. Like everything else, radical politics overrides common sense.

A few years ago a fella killed a wolf in Missouri during deer season. He thought it was a big coyote. The Missouri Dept of Conservation did a DNA test on it and said it came from Minnesota. Haven't heard of any other sightings.

Agenda 21 from the United Nations. It is pervasive throughout the US and as more people have been finding out about it they have been fighting it. Part of agenda 21 is increasing the carnivore/predator populations in rural areas to "in theory" drive the populace towards the urban centers knowing that concentrated populations are easier to corral and control.

There was one killed on the freeway by the New Munich exit about 1.5 years ago (west of St. Cloud). I saw one west of Alexandria by Farwell probably 10 years ago.

Haven't seen any but have come across a few tracks north of Alexandria but one was killed by a car earlier this winter. Number of farmers say they have been seeing them now that it's calving season. Wouldn't surprise me if I catch one or two next season.

She should be just as afraid of coyotes taking her small dogs. Even big dogs get gobbled up by coyotes around here.

Been a wolf in a big park just south of the cities for years now. Well used to be just one...who knows if more now.