Embrace Bloggers and Social Media To Get Message Out

I just have to laugh!   Some notions take a long time to die.   I could easily make this post my annual rant against the Minnesota DNR and their communication peeps who seemingly don’t have a 21st Century clue when it comes to communicating their message, but if I did the blog posting would largely look like it did last year.  (SEE HERE)

So, I’ll spare you all those details once again.   Point is I’ve been an outdoors writer here in Minnesota since 1987 and now because most of my communication efforts are online some entities, like the MN DNR, apparently fail to see the value.

Once again, the MN DNR is conducting their annual 2–day #RoundTable and I was not included.  Last year I sent a note in advance to DNR Communication Director Chris Niskanen (@ChrisNiskanen1) asking to be included, but alas, the note was never received.   Certainly after the blog post I wrote last year I figured I’d be on the radar for the 2013 #RoundTable session…but no such luck once again.

Here I am willing to invest my time and money to report happenings of my state’s fish and game department, but the take away is such information dissemination is not apparently that important.   What a shame.   Whether it is the MN DNR or even some manufacturer of a new outdoor product, you would think they would be doing their due diligence to include both bloggers and people from all other facets of social media.

Recently I attended a blogging conference and discovered how one of the most aggressive segments harnessing the power of blogging, Twitter and similar online communication tools targets the so-called “mommy blogger.”   That’s right, companies who promote diapers, sell mac and cheese products, encourage the use of real butter for cooking, and so on are light years ahead of others when it comes to tapping into these emerging forms of new media.

IMG_6969

Back at the farm, I cooked up some brats to serve my hungry hunters during the fall 2012 firearms deer season.

One particular company I’ve been impressed with on Twitter is Johnsonville (@JvilleGrilling)   Not only do they tweet often and with content that adds value (not just self-promo), but they also do one of the best jobs of engaging their followers of any company I have seen.   I posted a picture back during deer hunting season that they found of me grilling their brats…and days later they were using it, with my permission of course, all over their online marketing efforts.

I can relate many similar examples of how companies or groups are in-step with those of us who blog and tweet.   I once ripped a company in these blog pages several years ago about their product in how it was poorly designed.  They got upset with me and fired back…but in the end they changed their product design because they new I had some valid points that needed to be addressed.

I will be so bold as to predict that within five years most traditional forms of how people obtain their news will largely lose significance.   I’m talking newspaper, magazines, and to some lesser extent even nightly TV news coverage.   We are living in a transition period where people demand their news immediately, in a succinct fashion, and when it’s convenient for them to view it.   Blogging, social media and videos on demand delivers the message.

Yes, indeed, I find it somewhat odd how a company peddling baby diapers is far better at engaging their audience through the blogger network than my state’s game and fish department continues to be.   <Okay, this is where I would ordinarily insert a joke about shit, but I’ve chosen not to do that at this time. Ha!>

©2013 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved. No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

What Constitutes A “Shootable” Deer And Who Should Determine It?

Before I get deep into the crux of today’s blog post, take a look at these three videos taken about 5 1/2 weeks ago on my farm using the new Cuddeback Attack trail cameras.   Each video lasts about 30 seconds and in general shows a small buck browsing on some field corn.

At this stage during the crop growing year it appears the deer is consuming the secondary, more immature ears of corn that commonly grows on the corn stalks.   Thus, this deer AT THIS TIME OF THE YEAR does not appear to be doing any particular damage to the standing corn or its eventual crop yield.

That being said, earlier in the summer when all of the corn ears are immature and this deer goes browsing throughout the field…significant damage can then occur when deer choose to dine as you have witnessed.

Shifting gears just a bit…I did something fun with these videos.   I showed them to the neighbor who rents my farm and grows these crops.   This particular farmer also happens to be one of my hunting buddies each fall.   I told him, “look at that deer.   It just stands there defiantly taunting you to come get him if you don’t like what he’s doing.”

My buddy agreed, this fall that particular deer is what he is targeting as the deer of his choice during the firearms season.

Now, keep in mind this vendetta brewing between the farmer and the buck deer is all in good fun.   After all, isn’t that what the hunting experience should be all about anyway?   Everyone heads out into the woods for very personal reasons…and it’s quite fair to say not every hunter is motivated by the same set of factors.

Yet, oddly enough…if this deer traveled just 7 miles to the northeast of my farm’s location…it would then exist in a Minnesota deer zone protecting bucks like this one.   In fact, here in Minnesota we have a three year experimental project underway that protects bucks that don’t sport at least 4–points on one antler.   This buck clearly does not.

Yes, the antler-obsessed hunters here in Minnesota have long pushed for legislation to manage the hunting experience the way they believe it should be conducted.   Apparently it’s not good enough to use self-control whereby selectively harvesting a mature deer that fits the criteria of a specific hunting party.   Nope, this group of folks want to see Antler Point Restriction (APR) rules spread across the land like a wildfire on the windy prairie.

Okay, I’m not going to discuss the pros and cons of APR in this blog posting.   Instead, what I am going to underscore is the misguided notion among some that all of us hunt for the same reasons.   In fact, I will even go so far as to say pushing for the establishment of certain minimum restrictions on the size a buck deer before it can be legally harvested is downright selfish on the part of the hunters requesting such a prohibition.

This farm where I now hunt and live was first settled by my family back in 1856–-two years before Minnesota even gained statehood.   My ancestors traded provisions for venison with a friendly tribe of Chippewa Indians during those first years so I have a long-standing familial connection with deer hunting taking place on my property.   Indeed, I take personal exception with anyone pushing for game management actions only to better satiate their obsession for shooting a big deer.

Don’t get me wrong…I like big deer, too.   Over the years this farm has been home to some big deer as shown here and here, for example.   Yet, I am fervently opposed to the DNR telling me I am restricted from shooting certain deer because their management objectives are geared solely to satisfy the whims of a certain class of hunters.   When you manage for some hunters and not for all…it fuels a certain elitism that simply has no place in hunting, at least not in my honest opinion.

Yes, thank goodness I still live in a MN deer hunting zone that is not yet affected by rules governing the size of the buck I can harvest in my woods.   Just like the farmer who plans to hunt the particular deer shown in the videos this November, our reasons for hunting are often quite varied and not always fueled by the same passion for large racks.

I think it’s high time both hunters and DNR game managers alike begin to recognize there are differences in what drives each of us to pursue this wonderful sport called deer hunting.   To think we all go hunting for deer sporting massive racks is, well…rather naive at best.   If game management doesn’t involve the physical health of the deer herd, then it ought to be up to the individual hunter—and only that hunter—to choose what constitutes a “shootable” deer.

©2011 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved. No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Two Faribault (MN) Men Help Establish A New Wildlife Record

If you were to perform a Google search to determine the longest recorded lifespan for a Barred Owl you’ll discover a plethora of sources all claiming 18 years, 3 months as the well established longevity record for this avian species (found in the wild).   That is until recently when two Faribault area men, acting independently, made an effort to set the new record straight.

This is a story about the beginning and the end for one of nature’s creatures.   Unfortunately, there isn’t much information about what this Barred Owl did during the course of its lifetime, but there’s plenty to prove this particular Barred Owl was no ordinary bird.

Forest-Notes

Field notes taken by Forest Strnad in 1986

It started back on May 24th, 1986, Forest Strnad and a friend visiting from England were hiking in an area now known as the River Bend Nature Center on the southeast side of Faribault, Minnesota.   As they were walking along, the two friends suddenly observed a Barred Owl quickly fly out of a tree cavity.   As a Federally Licensed Bird Bander, Strnad decided to climb up the tree where he eventually found three nestling Barred Owls.

One by one he removed the young birds and brought them to the ground where he banded and recorded his amazing discovery.   Once banded, they were carefully returned to the tree thinking it to be a long-shot they would hear about these birds ever again.

Such is the life of a bird bander.   You leave your mark on a bird with the hopes that someday an interesting story will develop.   In the case of a migratory bird perhaps it will fly thousands of miles away when it is next discovered.   In the case of a Barred Owl, movement is rather minimal over its lifetime so seeing a bird travel even 20 or 30 miles might be an extraordinary circumstance.

IMG_4845_1

Close-up of bird band recovered by Rost.

Yet, in the case of Barred Owl carrying the band numbered 0667–95412, documented distance is not what made this bird’s discovery so unusual.   Instead, it was the Barred Owl’s age which shattered the previous longevity record by nearly six years.   In fact, a Barred Owl living for almost 24 years is unheard of even in captivity.

But this story doesn’t get written without another critical participant.   Faribault Fire Captain, Todd Rost, was working during June 2010 on a drowning recovery detail along the Cannon River when he witnessed a somewhat usual sight while kayaking.   There, floating in the water, was a tangled mess of feathers and monofilament line.

IMG_4817

Barred Owl as it was found on the Cannon River near Faribault.

Rost contacted me about his discovery concerned about how wildlife can suffer when humans are careless about our trash.   Subsequent to that contact, I blogged about his discovery a year ago which can be read HERE.

Honestly, we thought the story would end there figuring Rost had discovered a banded bird that succumbed to an unfortunate fate due to discarded fishing line.   Yet, the story was far from over as Rost later learned when he reported on the bird’s band information.

Initially Rost reported the bird as likely a Red-Tailed Hawk because it was badly decayed and the feathers were quite faded and water-worn.   Soon thereafter, Rost received a query from the Bird Banding Laboratory verifying information mostly because “we found that age of the bird is unusual.”

Rost followed-up by providing pictures and other documentation to confirm that the bird found was indeed the same Barred Owl that Forest Strnad had banded 24 years earlier.

Today, when you look at the longevity records for owls you will see the new Barred Owl record contains an entry that makes this Faribault area bird somewhat special, at least to folks who find interest in these sort of facts.   It also underscores the importance of bird banding efforts and their subsequent retrieval and reporting.

IMG_2025

Forest Strnad and Todd Rost hold the recovered band from Barred Owl numbered 0667-95412.

Indeed, it’s an unlikely set of circumstances that would bring two Faribault men together to help establish an important record for an owl that lived out its entire life in the wooded river valleys surrounding their town.   Yes, there’s a certain satisfaction for both Strnad and Rost in knowing they helped a local Barred Owl set a new lifespan record having documented 24 years of existence.

Todd's-Cert

Certificate awarded to Todd Rost on his recovery.

As incredible as that fact remains, what may be even more impressive is the knowledge that records show only two owls (of any species) that has been documented to have lived longer than the Faribault area Barred Owl known only as #0667–95412.

As Todd Rost will surely attest, finding a bird of any kind dead and entangled in fishing line is not the desired way to view these majestic creatures.   On the other hand, had this particular Barred Owl died of some other natural cause it might never have been found and reported—and that, too, would have been a great tragedy as we now understand the important facts.

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Blogger’s Note:  If you find a bird of any kind that has been banded, please follow the reporting information on the band or contact the Bird Banding Laboratory for additional information.   The information you provide can be critical to those wildlife professionals who research such details.   Even if you have bands several years old, the information is never too late to report.

Minnesota DNR Final CWD Management Briefing (4/7/11)

The Minnesota DNR held a final teleconference today on their Chronic Wasting Disease surveillance efforts new Pine Island, Minnesota—the location where a single deer tested positive for the disease late last year.

I won’t cover most of the details that can be read in the press release found HERE, but what follows are some tidbits of information gleaned from the question/answer session of the teleconference:

  • The MN DNR was very pleased with the cooperation and assistance by the public on this matter.   In particular, they were impressed how well the private landowners and several conservation organizations worked together on this important effort.
  • The fact that no additional deer tested positive is seen as great news from the DNR that this situation was caught on the front-end so early.
  • This fall hunters can expect a CWD Zone declared in the hunting regulations.   It will likely be the same area that was used in this most recent surveillance effort.
  • This means there will be continued MANDATORY testing of all deer taken within this zone.   In fact, many people in the public have been requesting this mandatory testing continue.   There will be voluntary testing in many of the deer management zones surrounding the CWD zone, once this is established.
  • It also means this zone will likely see more liberalized season and bag limits.   This is mostly due to the fact the area tends to have a high wintering deer density which can add to the CWD problem.
  • It is highly likely the fall firearms season for the CWD zone will be lengthened with fewer restrictions.
  • At this point the DNR is not sure if this will be a short or long term management concern.   It will depend on what happens in the future in regards to testing results.
  • The DNR hopes to have the fall deer hunting plans (hunting regs) finalized within the next month or so.   This will give hunters in this area ample lead time so they can plan their fall hunting activities.
  • Lou Cornicelli, DNR big game coordinator, indicated that within this recent testing area on average there are 3.5 to 4.5 deer harvested per square mile (during a normal fall hunting season).   Because this area historically has such high deer densities, that is the reason why the DNR will likely want to increase those harvest numbers.
  • In fact, the DNR figures this fall they will likely get a surveillance size quite similar in scope to what was recently just accomplished.
  • The DNR will not be doing any additional population assessments until late fall/winter.   With the summer foliage and dispersion of the herd it is just too difficult to do with any effectiveness.
  • Expect the recreational feeding ban for deer to remain in effect for some time within this CWD area of concern.

– = End of update = –

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota DNR Weekly CWD Management Briefing (3/3/11)

A quick update as to where things currently stand with the Minnesota DNR’s Chronic Wasting Disease management efforts near Pine Island, Minnesota.   In a nutshell, efforts are progressing nicely as the DNR is pleased with the on-going testing efforts.

Here are some tidbits I gleaned from today’s teleconference:

Samplingmap

  • The Minnesota DNR website has been updated including maps indicating where the samples have originated in the CWD surveillance area.
  • Landowner shooting permits ended as of February 28th.
  • In total, approximately 300 landowner shooting permits were distributed resulting in nearly 500 deer taken for sampling.
  • Dr. Lou Cornicelli, CWD Response Team incident commander, has high praise for the landowners in this area.   He states they did a fantastic job in helping with the testing effort.   He goes on to say they have been very supportive and overall been just tremendous people to work with during this phase of the response just ending.
  • Over the next two weekends the USDA sharpshooters will be working aggressively to complete the deer sampling effort.
  • So far the sharpshooters have accounted for about 100 deer.   They were trying to work properties adjacent to where landowner shooting was taking place, but the deer were too scattered to get desired results given their techniques.
  • As of now about 645 deer have been taken in the testing effort (this includes yearlings which are tested but not included in the study numbers).   Of that 645 deer, 427 deer fall within the surveillance group for the study (remember, 900 deer total are needed).   That being said, this CWD management effort is about 1/2 way there in terms of the sample numbers needed.
  • A total of 603 samples have been returned from the testing lab so far all showing negative (no disease present).   The DNR feels they are getting good distribution throughout the surveillance range for these samples.
  • The DNR also did an aerial survey on Monday and found the deer densities (distribution) are still where they expected them to be.
  • The aerial survey also showed 100% compliance with the recreational deer feeding ban so no enforcement activities have been necessary.
  • In terms of the available venison, so far the list has grown to over 300 people meaning nearly all of the harvested deer for sampling is eventually going into the food chain.

– = End of update = –

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota DNR Weekly CWD Testing Briefing (2/17/11)

Just quickly, here are some tidbits of information as gleaned from the Minnesota DNR’s weekly teleconference on their Chronic Wasting Disease testing effort near Pine Island, Minnesota:

  • First off, these weekly briefings might be put on hold for future weeks until either a significant discovery occurs or until greater numbers of tested animals have been completed.
  • On Monday night there was a public information meeting in Pine Island (MN) where over 350 concerned citizens turned out to show their interest in this subject.   The meeting was very civil, polite and most would agree it was constructive.
  • In general, the Minnesota DNR is finding great cooperation from both the general public and landowners on this effort now three weeks into it.   Dr. Lou Cornicelli states he could not be more pleased with how everything is working out so far.
  • At this point 300 shooting permits have been issued to cooperating landowners.   On average about 25 more permits are being issued daily.
  • As of 9:00am this morning there was a total of 260 deer that have been killed for testing.   Of this, only 180 deer are considered adults.   Note: Only adult deer are being counted toward the 900 deer that are needed for the completion of this CWD survey.
  • However, ALL DEER are being tested as part of the effort.
  • So far, there have been 240 test results returned with NO POSITIVES for CWD.
  • It should be noted that deer less than 12 months old generally do not test positive for CWD…that’s why testing adults is more important.
  • Due to the warmer weather as of late, the DNR has been forced to go out and get a bigger cooler facility (available tomorrow) so they can handle all the carcasses while the testing samples are out.
  • A list of about 200 people from the general public has put in a request for deer meat.   Bottom line is most of the deer taken in this surveillance effort will be consumed once they have been tested safe.
  • The MN DNR signed a contract late last week with the USDA Wildlife Service team (sharpshooters) who have used this week to establish landowner contact and formulate their culling plans.
  • It was pointed out that the sharpshooters are able to kill the deer over bait because ALL deer that come to the bait are subsequently killed for testing.
  • The sharpshooters will likely begin their efforts early next week.   They expect this involves about 8 to 10 shooters who generally work alone or in teams of two.
  • The DNR felt it necessary to supplement the efforts of the landowners with the federal sharpshooters in order to get the necessary testing samples taken prior to spring.
  • A deer feeding ban went into effect in four counties as of Monday.   During the aerial fly-overs the DNR was able to identify 39 recreational bait sites where people were feeding deer.   As of today, 25 of those people have been contacted or attended the public meeting on Monday night.   So far everyone has suspended those feeding efforts as requested.   The remaining 14 sites will be contacted today or tomorrow.   Generally there’s been good cooperation all around.
  • Oxbow park has a deer population of about 100 animals and the sharpshooters will likely be working at this location.
  • It was asked if the recent warm weather has created any concerns for the DNR.   At this point it has only created meat storage issues.   However, if the warm weather continues and more of the snow pack disappears rapidly…this could become a bigger issue.   Here in Minnesota after March 1st all bets are usually off with counting on snow to linger for any big duration of time.

For additional information on Minnesota’s ongoing CWD effort please click HERE.

– = End of update = –

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota Puts Its Chronic Wasting Disease Response Plan Into Action

Things are moving fast at the Minnesota DNR these days when it comes to formulating an agency response to act on the first positive CWD test report from a deer killed in Southeastern Minnesota by a bowhunter in late November.

Today, the MN DNR issued this press release and offered a teleconference question and answer session with Lou Cornicelli, the DNR’s Big Game Specialist heading those response efforts.   Here’s a few major excerpts from the news release along with additional information learned from the teleconference call.

…Landowners who obtain shooting permits from the DNR will be authorized to take deer in a portion of southeastern Minnesota within roughly 10 miles of where a CWD positive wild deer was found, as part of the agency’s efforts to sample wild deer in the Pine Island area for CWD.

Landowners who accept shooting permits will be allowed to authorize additional shooters. All harvested deer will be tested for CWD…

Essentially the DNR will be giving out to qualified landowners ~10 permits initially and when they fill them they would then likely get additional permits distributed five at a time.   This effort is NOT being termed a “hunt” in the traditional sense, rather, the department prefers the terminology calling it a “landowner shooting permit” for purposes of identifying the extent of this disease in the test area.   A “hunt” connotes that anybody could have a chance to participate, which is not the case.

At this time all shooting will be conducted by the landowners and folks with whom they delegate.   If needed, Federal sharpshooters might be contracted with to assist in the testing efforts to achieve the sample objectives.   It is expected some of the first samples may be taken as early as this weekend.

…Carcasses of deer taken can be retained by the landowner or designated shooters, or surrendered to DNR for donation to individuals.  CWD test results are expected to be available within three business days so that people holding carcasses can make decisions on processing and consumption…

The DNR will require all carcasses remain on the property where they are shot while testing procedures are being done to determine if the deer is positive for CWD.   The other option is all deer can be surrendered to the DNR where they will be donated to agencies for food, if the meat is determined to be wholesome.   Bottom line is MOST of the deer will likely be used for human food unless the results determine it to be unsafe to consume.   The DNR will be going to the landowner’s locations daily to obtain the needed tissue samples for testing.

…The deer population estimate based on the aerial survey has been completed and DNR estimates there are 6,500 deer within a 10-mile radius around the positive deer. Of those 6,500 deer, 1,900 were seen within the core area, which is roughly a 5-mile radius around the positive deer. Some of the highest deer numbers were observed in the area the positive deer was taken.  Based on these numbers, DNR has calculated a surveillance goal of 900 deer, of which 500 should be taken from the core area…

In other words, to get the proper sampling for this testing effort the landowners must shoot 900 deer—of which 500 must come within the 5–mile area surrounding where the first deer tested positive.   Recent helicopter census efforts have determined that within this 5–mile area there is a total population of 1,900 deer.   Furthermore, in the township land sections immediately surrounding the location where the deer tested positive, this 9–square mile area contains about 750 deer.   That represents a density of about 65–70 deer/square mile.   Most of this heavy concentration is because of recreational feeding efforts and deep snows.   The typical (more ideal) density levels for deer would be 15–20/square mile for this area.

Cornicelli states that it is the process of recreational deer feeding by unsuspecting people that can be the leading causative factor in how this disease gets spread from one animal to another.   Therefore;

…a deer feeding ban covering Dodge, Goodhue, Olmsted and Wabasha counties will be in place later this month. The feeding ban includes a wider area because the potential extent of the CWD infection is not known and one of the most probable mechanisms for CWD spread among deer is over a food source that concentrates animals…

So far the DNR has had good cooperation from all landowners in the area for both the sampling efforts and also to stop any purposeful efforts toward deer feeding.

…DNR officials will present current CWD information and plans at a public meeting scheduled for Monday, Feb. 14, at 7 p.m. in the Pine Island High School cafeteria. After the presentation, a panel of experts from DNR, the Minnesota Board of Animal Health and the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association will be available to answer questions…

The DNR is hoping to make contact with as many landowners as possible before the public meeting so they have a heads up on what is happening and landowners don’t have to go to the public meeting to hear the details first.

Some other random points worth mentioning as gleaned from today’s teleconference:

  • A fixed wing aircraft was initially used to survey the 10–mile radius area with a helicopter used for a more thorough census conducted within the 5–mile radius “core” area.   The center of which is where the positive sampling was taken back in November.
  • Once a population estimate could be established then a surveillance (sample) size goal could be established.
  • The deer are unevenly distributed in this area due mostly to snow depth and feeding efforts.
  • It’s going to be a difficult next few weeks because by mid-March there could be snow melt, flooding, etc. that would make the sampling effort more challenging.
  • Carcass hold time will be brief as the lab will get results back on deer within three days.
  • So far (as of Friday) only about 6 or 8 landowners have been permitted so far.   Not aware of any deer taken yet, but that will likely change over this weekend.
  • Local ordinances cannot be exempted for discharge of firearms so if deer must be targeted (at some point in the future) around municipalities this will present unique challenges.   Hopefully the cities will work with the DNR.
  • Wisconsin has CWD positive deer about 150 miles away from this site.   The positive deer is about 3 miles southwest of the elk farm where CWD was detected positive in the captive elk herd.   People can draw their own conclusions as to how this disease got into the wild deer population, but there will likely be no means of determining for sure how it occurred.
  • Disposition of the deer carcass will be up to the landowner, unless it has been determined to be a positive test.   Then the deer is property of DNR and they will take possession of it.
  • Samples will be sent to the diagnostic lab every day.
  • If a positive is found the surveillance plans might need to be adjusted.
  • Concern was raised about all the “starter castles” where people in this infected area might own about 4 to 5 acres of land and may not want hunting that close to their homes.   The DNR says most of this concentration is as a result of feeding so when this is banned the deer should eventually begin to scatter.
  • Penalties for feeding the deer might be just a warning this first year, unless they are determined egregious—then it might warrant a citation.
  • DNR estimates the costs for conducting this short-term effort will be $200,000 on the low end and possibly up to $400,000 on the high end.  Of course, this is all subject to change depending on how things go with the process.
  • Because the DNR does not know what the disease will do to a deer herd in the long-term that is why it is so critical not to let it get established here in Minnesota.  Dealing with this is a generational issue meaning it is important to eradicate it on the front end so the disease is not devastatingly out of control 50 or 100 years from now.

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Petition Afoot To Reverse Minnesota’s Antler Point Restriction Requirement

Several weeks back I was contacted by an individual named Rod Sommerfield who was quite upset with what he saw during Minnesota’s first hunting season contending with the new antler point restriction requirement in zone 3 last fall.   Sommerfield proceeded to articulate to me several experiences he witnessed that were unfortunate occurrences of the new rule—mostly it was incidents of wanton waste caused by hunters violating the burdensome new rule and then not wanting to be in possession of an illegal deer.

DSC00513

To many deer hunters what grows above the ears should not be counted to determine a legal buck.

Bottom line was this particular hunter had seen enough and for the sake of a healthy hunting experience he has started a grassroots campaign to get this trophy-focused management requirement removed from the Minnesota hunting regulations.   Sommerfield, like many other hunters in Minnesota, simply believes the antler point restriction system does not mesh well with how the majority of hunters traditionally enjoy the firearms deer hunting experience.

To be quite honest, I tend to agree and have thus subsequently lent my support to the cause.   My rationale for opposing APR is not necessarily well outlined in the verbiage for how the petition reads, but the end result of getting this onerous requirement stricken from the regulation books needs to be done soon before this poorly executed wildlife management concept is allowed to spread statewide like an out-of-control cancer.

Oh yeah, I know these sort of sentiments were experienced when the principle was first introduced out in Pennsylvania, too…and I know over time most Keystone State hunters have moderated their negative thinking about APR.   Be that as it may, I still don’t like APR and I plan to extensively outline my reasons why in a future blog posting (likely after I return from the SHOT Show).

In the meantime, I offer up this quick post to:  1) share with you the effort that is underway via petition; and 2) start generating some discussion over the positives/negatives of continuing using an antler point restriction system here in Minnesota.

To download the petition please CLICK HERE.

For additional information regarding the petition, please contact:

Rod Sommerfield
(sommerfieldr@sleepyeyetel.net)
(Phone: 507/696-3246)

©2011 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

If You’re Gonna Report It Then Get The Facts Correct

PiPress01

Here’s a quick post as a follow-up to yesterday’s blog topic.   Not sure who to blame here…but I assume the Associated Press didn’t do all their careful fact checking so somehow WISCONSIN now shows up when it should read MINNESOTA.   Especially because the entirety of the brief article all relates to happenings recently in Minnesota.

Is this another example of the media just gushing to make hunters look bad?   Perhaps it wouldn’t look so obvious if they at least took the time to get the facts accurate in their reporting on the topic.

©2010 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Tags:

Minnesota DNR Shouldn’t Put Bear Hunters In This Position

Ely-area research bear killed

A radio-collared bear associated with the North American Bear Center in Ely has apparently been killed, despite a call for hunters to spare the collared-bears.

The blood-spattered collar of a yearling named Sarah was anonymously dropped off in a Department of Natural Resources mailbox Tuesday morning, said Sue Mansfield, a biologist at the Wildlife Research Institute and North American Bear Center.

“It’s hard, it’s just so hard,” she said.

Read the entire news story HERE.

I just don’t get it.   Last week [and again today] the Minnesota DNR issues this news release asking for Minnesota’s bear hunters to avoid shooting radio-collared bears that are being used for various research projects in Minnesota.   Of course, as the story above eludes to, someone within our hunting ranks apparently didn’t get the memo.   More importantly, their actions are making the rest of us hunters look bad and that deeply concerns me.

Who do I blame for this?   Of course, it seems only logical to blame the person who killed the bear.   Even though they broke no Minnesota laws his/her actions are being viewed very negatively by the non-hunting public.   Moreover, the person shooting the bear should have admitted his/her mistake by reporting it properly (as requested to do so in the news release) rather than doing the cowardly thing of just anonymously dropping off the bloodied collar at some DNR office.

But let’s set those details aside for just a moment.   I blame the Minnesota DNR for even putting us hunters in that position.   Seriously, if you’re going to make a big deal out of this then why not make the act of killing a research bear a violation of law or rule.   Certainly the MN DNR Commissioner could have promulgated such an order.   Instead, issuing press releases asking for cooperation that subsequently doesn’t get followed damages our reputation as an entire class of sportsmen.

The point is if you don’t want fluorescently collared research bears killed then make it a game violation so the person who doesn’t follow the desired rules gets properly labeled—”poacher” or “game law violator.”   Instead, the person who committed this act gets named as a “hunter” and that makes us all out to appear as untrustworthy, blood-thirsty, uncaring individuals who fail to play by any ethical rules set forth for our sport.

Oh, sure, I know what the DNR is thinking…by not having the shooting of a research bear a law violation it gives the hunter who legitimately makes a mistake some slack.   I’d buy that thinking…except for the fact now in S.E. Minnesota the DNR expects me to count a deer’s antlers to make sure it qualifies as a legal buck.   Surely most hunters would agree the task of identifying a brightly colored collar on a bear is easier to determine than counting points on a buck at a distance.   Agree?

Believe me, I’m not defending the person who shot the research bear in any way.   I rather think their behavior totally lacked good judgment throughout this entire incident.

Yet, if the Minnesota DNR would have made the killing of a research bear a wildlife violation, then the perpetrator of such an act would be distinguished from the 99.8% of the other sportsmen who participate in our sport faithfully playing by the rules.   Instead, all hunters must now endure the public backlash because someone, acting entirely within their legal rights to do so, chose not to act in a reasonable manner by letting Sarah the bear live so her life could be further studied.

©2010 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 36 other followers