# MN Intensive Harvest of Migratory Deer in RRV



## bwnelson (Oct 29, 2002)

PREFACE: This is NOT a res/non res thread and I respectfully ask the managment to lay its best "Ike Turner B Slap" on the first person to take it there.

OK, preface aside, my party hunts the Red River North of Fargo. Over the years we have noticed that the individual members of the deer herd in that area do not wear license plates, carry ID, nor to the best of our knowledge idenify themselves as "deer citizens" of either state. In fact, said deer have no qualms about swimming across the river between the states once the "Orange Army of Occupation" begins its November march.

This year our (North Dakota Unit 2B) party harvested half the number of deer we did last year. Even saw fewer than two years ago when the corn was still up. Thanksgiving weekend we hunted two days and only saw 6 does the whole time (a typical day on the property would be 20+, 27 were out feeding the night after 2005 season). We hypothesize that this is due to 1. MN Intensive harvest allowing up to 4 bonus tags for does that comprise the same herd, and 2. MN season opening a week before Nodak (due to the Friday before Veterans Day anomaly).

Question: how does the GNF monitor and figure acceptable harvest for the border crossing herd? Is there any cooperation/collaboration with the MN DNR regarding this resource or is it just assumed that the deer stay in their respective States during the season?

Anybody have management ideas for this situation?


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Yea, Those a-holes from MN!!!!!! Just kidding. 
Actually I hunt MN about 20 miles south of Fargo along the red. The deer do definately swim the river. We actually noticed as many does as ever and less bucks (because all the guys shoot young bucks and wonder why we never see any big bucks!!!! Another story there.)

I don't know if that is a trend you have noticed or just an anomaly that happened this one time. I always liked when ND opened at noon on Friday and then we opened on Saturday. I always figured that would drive more deer to the MN side. There are plenty of extra doe tags sold in ND as well as MN so I don't really think that is the problem.


----------



## SODSUCKER (Mar 24, 2005)

I have been hunting for years North of Moorhead along the river. There are definately less deer in the last 3-years than ever before. I am positive that it is because of the intensive harvest permits. This year is the first year that I haven't been hunting up there, but a freind of mine said that there were even less deer than before.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

Why wouldnt they just swim back over then when the season starts up. They know what areas are safe and arent. If they travel back and forth so much, they will stay where they are ssafe-especially if they are getting shot at every time they cross the river


----------



## slough (Oct 12, 2003)

I hunt along the RR about 25 miles north of Grand Forks, and it seemed like after MN's season closed (the 12th I think) that there were a lot less deer on the ND side. Some guys were saying it was because there were a bunch of unharvested beets on the MN side so the deer just went over there. We pushed river bottoms all afternoon on Sunday and didn't even kick out a deer. Who knows, the weather was pretty warm too for most of the season and after they get harrassed they probably don't move too much unless they absolutely have to and they figure out where they're safe. Pretty cool to see how those deer swim the river like it's not even there.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Just a thought boys, but could the herd reduction measures actually be working? Was that not the goal? Most of us can say regardless of the unit we hunt that there are less deer than we saw 3-4 years ago and that is a good thing! It was the goal and it appears the management is working as planned!

The last three years at the Advisory meetings the G&F have been talking about this time coming when bonus doe tags where going to be cut back. In fact in many units there will not be extra tags after the second drawing it the herd reduction goes as planned. That is and has been the goal from the start!

In the unit I hunt, big mature does are not as common as in the past. The yearling doe normally first time around only has one fawn, where an adult doe will normally have two or three if the conditions and food source are available.

Most hunters target full size does vs young of the year, so in a sense we reduce the herd by three each time we take a adult doe vs a yearling! A;; of this is good. Last year deer/vehicle collision dropped in the state. The G&F had from what I understand one of the lowest number of complaints on deer predidation over the winter. Granted it was mild, but most of the last 5 have been as well.

So seeing less deer may not make one happy out hunting, but it should make one realize the reduction goals are working!


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

I think that the weather has a lot to do with it as well guys. We saw a lot of deer in the river bottoms on opening morning in MN. It was colder. I bow hunted down there on Thanksgiving day and it was warm, and I didn't see one deer. They need some weather to drive them into the river bottoms in my experience.


----------



## bwnelson (Oct 29, 2002)

Ron,

I have no complaints if the management goals are met. However, I will be contributing feedback in MN this winter that the unit N of Moorhead no longer needs intensive harvest (especially in light of the rifle zone being extended to the river - the harvest statistics should be an interesting comparison to 2005). Our mixed state harvest took 3 bucks in the 2.5/3.5 age class that met our minimum antler goal of 4x4 & wider than the ears. The three does were 2 1.5's and a fawn.

Were the nicer than normal bucks a product of a healthy population balance or just passing on some basket racks last year? Probably both. Next seasons tag allocation will be interesting to say the least. As for me, I'll do a little extra work on the cover between now and next season.

To hijack my own thread ... anybody have suggestions re cockleburrs 1. Should they be taken out of the cover mix? 2. What is the best way to get them out of the woods without lighting a fuse that burns from Grand Forks to Fargo?, and 3. What should be planted to replace them in a cover strip near farmed land?


----------



## SODSUCKER (Mar 24, 2005)

bwnelson,
I agree that the units North of Moorhead should be excluded from the intensive harvest permits for awhile. Also why would you want to remove the natural cover? cockleburrs are definatelly a pain but so are two prongs. However they are part of nature and I don't think that they should be messed with. That being said the easiest way to get cockleburrs and two prongs out of the woods is by making a drive through the woods, you should be able to remove quite a few.


----------

