How many actually pick up the phone?

[NorthJeff]

How many of us that discuss all these deer management issues actually pick up the phone and call your local DNR biologist to get their opinoin? I know the DNR has to have these public meetings, take public comment, etc. but how many take the time on a more personal level? There are many that have a strong dislike for the DNR...yet they have never talked with them personally. Is that you? How many have gone to recent meetings to strongly voice their "concern", when they have never talked to their local biologist to see if their concern is even valid in the first place? Or studied any published material on the subject? Talked to any professional source?

I'd encourage anyone that actually really wants to learn, wants to understand, to pick up the phone and call your local biologist. See that these individuals are actually people, with personalities, with a job to do, and that love the out of doors and wildlife just as much or more than most of us...or they wouldn't be in the position they are in!

Just wondering who has tried it, and I'd like to challenge you to do so if you haven't. No, they won't have all the answers, and I'm not saying you'll agree with everthing they say, but I would bet most of the time it would be positive, if you listen.

[UP Ed]

Rob Aho our DNR biologist up here impressed me at the Baraga meeting. I had called him a month earlier and asked him what the boundaries of the new DMU031 were. He told me but allowed that he wasn't 100% sure on the boundary. When I saw him at the Baraga meeting I reintroduced myself to him and recounted our previous conversation. He had specifically brought the legal description for me in anticipation of possible seeing me at the meeting.

Whenever our sportsmen's club has asked the DNR to attend one of our meeting they are always willing. At hunter safety our local CO's really do a great job on any aspect of the course we would like help on.

I have always found them willing to talk, I just have to call. I still would like to see them organize more public meeting on an on going basis. I think the heated rhetoric would decrease and more substantive discussions would increase.

[Neal]

While you're on the phone with the boilogist, invite him/her out to your property to have it evaluated for habitat....very educational.

[QDMAMAN]

I have a very good working relationship with John Neiwoonder our biologist. Every time I've requested info he has gone above and beyond to accomodate me and our Eaton Co. QDMA Branch.
Our branch also collects bio data for John and the MDNR at our annual Deer Pole that is greatly appreciated by John and his staff.
Jeff your right on as usual and thanks for posting the question.
Big T

[Nimrod1]

While you're on the phone with the boilogist, invite him/her out to your property to have it evaluated for habitat....very educational. Not to start anything, but I did invite my bio out. He told me they don't do that anymore.:confused: I still think we have a good working relationship though. Anyone know for sure if the private land eval is supposed to be part of their job, or do some do it as more of a pr thing?

[Neal]

Really? Hmmmm....Maybe they stopped doing that, or maybe just your location. We had Arnie Carr from the Saginaw office out a couple years ago.

Anyone else have any info on this?

[Nimrod1]

Neal,
Was she the biologist or a forestry person? My biologist did give me the number for our area forester. I have not called him yet.

[Letmgro]

I have an open email communication with our NE Michigan area biologist (Elaine Carlson). Very knowledgable and easy to communicate with.

If you don't like picking up the phone, try email.;)

[Luv2hunteup]

Before I bought my land I did call the Soo office and Newberry office and talked with both biologists. After that I just visited the Soo office several times to see what I could learn. I was then refered to the farm services building and met with them along with the conservation district in the Soo.

I left the Soo with a pocket full of information, some phone numbers and began to interview land planners. I hired an approved consultant to write a plan for me, filled out some forms, met with him and outlined my goals. A month or so later my plan arrived, I reviewed it, made a few changes and sent it to the DNR in Newberry for approval. During the time I was waiting on my plan approval I went back to the Soo and applied for cost share monies for a few different actvites of the plan.

I didn't get approval for everything that I applied for but I did get approval for permanent vegative openings (food plots) and some tree/shrub plantings. It worked out to me supplying the labor + equipment and the government paying for lime, seed fertilizer, trees, shrubs plus 3/4 of the cost of the plan.

Was it worth a visit? You bet it was! I now have some of the best deer hunting for miles around. I like to refer to it as Quality Deer Hunting UP style. Get involved.

[farmlegend]

I wish more hunters would have a diologue with their field biologists. However, it is tougher in some areas than others. My particular region is about to get its fourth biologist in as many years. Hope the next one sticks around.

[Leon2]

I didn't call my local biologist, but here's the letter I wrote him about the DNR's management plan for DMU 017. I hope those who hang around this forum send out similar letters on your local DMU plan:


Dear Mr. Ainslie:

I am writing to comment on the DNR’s draft deer management plan for DMU 017. Generally, the Superior Deer Management association supports the department’s plan and we thank you for seeking public input on your efforts. We offer the following comments:

1. We support a target population goal of approximately 25 deer per square mile for most of the DMU. We believe this is a realistic population goal. We appreciate that the DNR recognizes that the current population may be slightly below this target. We support efforts to continue reasonable antlerless harvests of 1-3 antlerless deer per square mile provided this harvest helps achieve the overall target population goal. We believe it is essential that we continue to harvest some antlerless deer and that we do not overharvest our buck population, giving us excessively low buck-to-doe ratios. Because of the strong bias against any antlerless harvest in some parts of the DMU, we offer our support to assist in communication, education and public outreach efforts to generate higher levels of hunter acceptance for reasonable antlerless harvests.

2. As a general principle, we support your efforts to protect forest regeneration from excessive deer browsing. We believe the department needs to be especially vigilant in protecting cedar and hemlock regeneration, given their importance for winter deer yards and thermal protection for wintering whitetails in the EUP. We support the department’s efforts to purchase and preserve large deer yards as critical winter deer habitat using Deer Range Improvement Program funds. We also suggest you pursue other programs to encourage and assist private landowners to retain and manage these thermal cover areas for winter deer protection, particularly in the Gogemain Swamp area.

3. We support the department’s strategies to increase the number of deer on public land. We support the continued harvest of mature timber on public land as one of the most important acts the DNR can take to improve habitat for deer and other wildlife. We encourage the department to consider partnerships with outdoor groups like ours to experiment with planting low maintenance food plots on public land to further improve the habitat and hunting success on public land.

4. We support the department’s interest in combining the agricultural areas of DMU 049 (surrounding the Rudyard area) with DMU 017. We believe the deer habitat around Rudyard is similar to most of DMU 017 and we believe it could be better managed if it were managed as one deer management unit.

5. We thank you for recognizing that there is “significant interest in quality deer management in DMU 017.” We encourage the department to pursue more programs to reduce the excessive harvest of young bucks (both 1.5 year old and button bucks) so that our deer herd consists of more bucks and older bucks than exist in our current herd structure. We believe that recent large scale public surveys clearly show the public wants and expects more protection for young bucks. We stand ready to assist you in any such programs you wish to consider. The department does refer to QDM as a “management scheme.” The word scheme frequently has a negative connotation and we request that you use the term “principle” or something similar when referring to QDM programs.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft management program. Please let me know if we can provide further information about our position on deer management issues.


Yours truly,




Leon E. Hank, Board Member
Superior Deer Management association

[One Eye]

Yes, I do.

Dan