Hunters pack Capitol over deer hunt

[Skunk]

Finally some outrage in the face of the DNR.

"State conservation officials should re-evaluate their deer population formulas and stop encouraging hunters to kill antlerless deer, hunters and lawmakers said during a hearing Thursday."

Hunters pack Capitol over deer hunt

By Todd Richmond, Associated Press Writer, found at Fox11online.com

Thursday, 17 Dec 2009

MADISON, Wis. (AP) - State conservation officials should re-evaluate their deer population formulas and stop encouraging hunters to kill antlerless deer, hunters and lawmakers said during a hearing Thursday.

The hunters and lawmakers pounded away at the Department of Natural Resources for hours, blaming the agency's herd control measures for a weak November gun hunt. The agency's overzealous strategies have led to so many dead deer they have put Wisconsin's $1 billion-a-year deer hunting heritage is in jeopardy, they said.

"We run the risk of ruining this state's great deer hunting tradition for our sons and daughters," said Tom Klieman, a Kewaunee hunter and member of Northeastern Wisconsin Concerned Deer Hunters.

DNR Secretary Matt Frank told lawmakers the agency knows hunters are frustrated. The agency suspended its contentious earn-a-buck strategies going into the 2009 hunts and has proposed raising the population goals in more than a dozen hunting zones in 2010.

"I know there is frustration out there," he said.

Deer hunters have seethed about the DNR's regulations for decades. But that anger exploded in November after hunters killed only about 195,000 deer, down 29 percent from 2008.

They insist the DNR has inflated herd estimates for years. The agency based its herd control strategies on those estimates, including earn-a-buck regulations, which require a hunter kill an anterless deer before taking a buck, more antlerless tags and extra seasons wrapped around the traditional November hunt. The moves have devastated the herd and left hunters empty-handed, they say.

Legislators heading into an election year have tapped into the uproar. Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker, D-Weston, called earlier this month for every DNR employee involved with deer management to be fired, a move Frank rejected.

The state Assembly and Senate natural resources committee set up the hearing Thursday to listen to the DNR's explanations. Hunters, many dressed in camouflage and blaze orange, jammed the room.

Lawmakers took turns telling Frank how hundreds of their constituents are fed up with the agency.

Sen. Neal Kedzie, R-Elkhorn, said he has compiled 385 pages of complaints. Rep. Amy Sue Vruwink, D-Milladore, said constituents asked her if they could get their license fees back because they didn't see any deer this fall.

One hunter after another insisted the DNR's deer population figures are flawed. The herd hasn't been large enough to support reduction strategies for almost a decade, they said.

"Do they actually go outdoors? Do they look?" Jeff Mitchell, a hunter from Brodhead, said outside the hearing. "You have to quit shooting so many does."

Ron Kulas, legislative liaison for the Wisconsin Bowhunters Association, told the DNR to bring in third party experts to review their population formula. The agency also needs to study how predators such as wolves and bears have affected deer statewide, he said.

"It has everything to do with math, statistics, counting," Kulas said.

Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Waterford, questioned why DNR's biologists didn't realize the reduction strategies were working years ago, especially since hunters started telling the agency they weren't seeing deer in the woods. He said it would make sense to scale back to only the 9-day traditional season for five years.

Frank acknowledged the herd has shrunk in some areas, due in part to recent harsh winters and agency herd control strategies. The deer harvest across the upper Midwest is down this year, he added, noting Minnesota saw a 12 percent decline and Michigan a 10 percent to 20 percent drop, he said.

He noted the agency dropped earn-a-buck requirements across much of the state going into the 2009 hunts, reduced antlerless tags, tabled a plan to extend the 9-day hunt to 16 days next year and has proposed higher population goals in 13 management zones next year.

The agency also is working to improve population calculations and hopes to research predator impacts and deer deforestation, Frank said.

"I think we are listening," he said. "Look at our actions."

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/hunters-pack-capitol-over-weak-deer-hunt

[steve]

The biggest predator in my area is the Amish.  During this past season a couple of them where bragging on how many they had shot out of there buggy along gravel roads at our local feed mill and they Amish are honest. That is a bunch of BS

[Skunk]

Steve,

They sure would seem to have the perfect opportunity to poach, but I don't know much about the Amish culture. In other words, I'm not sure what they are capable of when it comes to breaking the law.

[banen]

AMEN!! I am glad they are finally starting to hear from outraged hunters.  I hope they will start to turn this around or the attrition of hunters will continue at an ever increasing rate.  You don't need to be a genius to figure out that we are heading towards fewer and fewer hunters every year as it is.  Just look in the north bound trucks and SUV's proudly showing their orange on I-94 or 51 on the Thursday and Friday before opener.  Not all, but definitely a lot of gentlemen who have seen a lot of seasons.   I think I once calculated the the DNR spends over $2M a day!!  We sure don't seem to be getting very much for that.  Lets keep the DNR field guys, eliminate a bunch of bureaucrats and overhead and redistribute that money to fund impactful programs or at least back to the tax payers. 

Please take the time to call or write your state senators to voice your opinion.  That is the only way to fix the DNR, protect our traditions, conserve our natural resources, and feed Wisconsin's economy.   

[buck460XVR]

In my county the gun buck kill was very close to where it was last year. The bow kill for bucks is actually up. Still most hunters around here claim they saw fewer bucks than in the past. Don't seem to make much sense. If earn a buck would have been in place like last year, antlerless figures woulda been close to last years. This after two years of hard winters and aggressive antlerless hunting. Seems many that were unsuccessful are trying hard to justify their coming home empty. 

Are deer numbers down? Sure they are........but only because we are trying to keep a balance between keeping hunters happy, and trying to control deer damage and car/deer accidents. Are bear and wolves taking significant numbers of deer? Sure they are, but deer numbers(regardless of how counted) are still higher than they were twenty-five years ago. Any of us that have hunted deer in Wisconsin for more than twenty years, remember years when we would have been overjoyed to harvest the number of deer harvested this year. No matter how much bitchin' we do about the DNR, their herd counts and number of permits issued, it still come down to us as hunters and land owners. Most deer hunting on private land is controlled by the land owner. He determines how many hunters are allowed on, the numbers and type of deer that can be shot. The majority of deer hunting in Wisconsin is done on private land with limited access. We as hunters also have the choice of what to shoot, what not to shoot and how many to shoot. Just cause the DNR issues 10 million permits, we as hunters don't have to fill them all. You want to whine about something, whine about those that shoot everything that moves. Whine about the land owner tryin' to collect deer damage and having to fill 40 antlerless tags before he can collect. Convince the farmer that borders your property not to put in for deer damage permits.....maybe offer him some cash to compensate him for his losses. If you're not willing to do that, don't whine when he takes 40 does off his 160 acres.

Seems we have become spoiled. If we can't see 40-50 deer on opening day anymore without leaving the heated comfort of our elevated box stand,  it must be the DNRs fault. If we can't pass up two or three 120 class bucks every year before filling our tag with a 160 class buck, it must be the DNRs fault. There's a reason they call it deer hunting and not deer shooting. I went out last weekend for the antlerless hunt and saw as many deer on both private and public land as I have ever seen two weeks after the regular gun season. But then, the corn has been harvested and there is snow on the ground making deer much easier to see than they were opening weekend. I saw more deer in 2 hours on heavily hunted public land than I saw all opening weekend on private land. Went back to that same private land and had many opportunities to fill my empty tag and decided not to. If you want more deer, don't shoot. Convince your fellow hunters not to shoot.....then it don't matter how many deer the DNR says we have. This year some of the public land I hunt went from herd control to a regular quota area. I bought three $12 antlerless tags with the intent to leave at least two unfilled. I decided in the end not to fill any, altho the opportunity was there. Figured that would do more good than whining.

[jcn59]

Buck 460 guy,   You just completely exonerated (sp) the DNR.  You aren't one of them, are you?   Do you realize that a 39 year old hunter, who has hunted every year since he was old enough to buy a license just experienced the worst hunt of his ENTIRE LIFE?

If too many does have been shot, many of us are guilty.   I'll take my share of the blame.   But I want the so-called experts who I paid to manage the herd to take their share of the blame, too.  I saw fewer deer every hunt since about 1999 in northern Wisconsin yet the DNR gave (sold) us as many doe tags as we wanted.   I believed their crap about how their "hard science"  is more accurate than our declining deer sightings.  I could go on but most of you already heard it.

But I can sum up just how out of touch the DNR is with just one question:  What the he!! was the DNR thinking ten days before the season started trying to give us a 16 day season for next year?  WE PAY THESE GUYS TO BE THE EXPERTS!   We need to fire the whole bunch of them.  And WE need to stop shooting does until the herd increases to a sustainable number.


There is always talk about winterkill, but little talk about wolf kill.  Why are we paying the DNR to protect wolves.   Our present wolf population will kill and eat parts of 30,000 deer a year.  (Is that about how much license sales dropped this year?)   If you multiply 30,000 by the cost of a deer license ($24.) you come up with around $720,000. in lost revenue.    This is a drop in the bucket compared to what will happen in 2010.  Watch and see.

I don't  think the field wardens are to blame for Wisconsin's deer mismanagement.   There.  This was my rant.  I'm better now.

[buck460XVR]

Buck 460 guy,   You just completely exonerated (sp) the DNR.  You aren't one of them, are you?   Do you realize that a 39 year old hunter, who has hunted every year since he was old enough to buy a license just experienced the worst hunt of his ENTIRE LIFE?

LOL...........no I ain't "one of them", and I ain't sayin' I agree with everything they say and do. But I'm a 56 year old hunter that has been hunting every year since he was old enough to buy a license and I just experienced one of the better hunts of my entire life.......and I still came home empty handed. As a 39 year old hunter you started to hunt at the time when deer populations in Wisconsin exploded. This despite the fact that antlerless permits went from none to the old 4 person once every two years party tag to virtually unlimited antlerless. At the same time turkeys were reintroduced and became another hunting option to everyone in the state. The biggest difference I've seen on the past 45 years is it used to be if a guy got a deer, any deer, it was a big deal. If you got a buck, even a forkhorn, everyone in town came to see it. If you got a 16'' ten-pointer you shot the biggest buck in the area........now, it's just another deer, and many will say you shoulda let him "walk". One reason areas could support more does, was because there weren't many bucks alive after season. Now we pass up small bucks to let them "grow". Since the area can only support the same number of deer we must shot more does.......it ain't brain surgery. Used to be if you wanted to hunt deer you had to go to the big woods.......there were no deer on ag land. I remember hunting snowshoe hares in the BRF State Forrest back in the 60s and 70s and seeing 50 or more deer dead in one deer yard. Since then, deer have figured out that people mean food, have since become accustomed to being around people, and have moved to farm land. Now many expect the farmer to put up with heavy deer damage just so we can see 40 deer on opening morning. I have a good farmer friend that has 220 acres in the middle of a several "recreational" land parcels. He has 50 -60 deer in his fields most every night, cause the neighbors don't shoot any does. When he applies for deer damage and has to shoot antlerless, those neighbors come up for the weekend and trash him and his property cause he's wreckin' their deer huntin'. He has told them, pay me for the damage and I won't apply. Ain't happened yet. I've been goin' to Northern Wisconsin since I was 6 years old. Used to be if you saw a deer up there it was really sumpthin'. Now I refuse to ride my motorcycle up there at night because of the number of deer on the roads.

 Used to be if hunters didn't see deer, they did something about it. They would get with the neighbors, make large drives and folks were happy if any of them got a deer. Most of the time the meat was split up amongst those that participated. Now neighbors refuse to do that cause they're afraid someone else is gonna get the opportunity to shoot "their" deer. Besides, they've invested hundreds of dollars in an elevated stand and warm boots......and the ATV to get them there......why go out and walk in the cold. Used to be most that hunted, hunted with iron sights and guns that were fairly accurate only out to 100 yards or so. Now most have a weapon with optics capable to taking animals out past 300 yards.  Part of the problem with these extended seasons, special youth and antlerless hunts before the regular season is not the amount of deer taken, but the education the deer get before regular gun season. They learn quick where they are safe and where they are not. They also learn how to get there without being seen. Deer are gettin' smarter and hunters are gettin' dumber and lazier. Too many think they can hunt like they see on TV. Sittin' in a box talkin' and movin' and all they gotta do is wait for and hour till the right "shooter" comes in to feed on the corn pile. Then they claim...."man, that was a tough hunt".

 Ask the bow hunters how many deer are out there. Seems the number of deer(especially BIG bucks) taken is still on the rise. Hell, back in '67 or '68(can't remember anymore) when I took my first buck with a bow, I believe there was a total of 91 deer taken by bow in the whole state. Now we probably average 4 times that many everyday of bow season. Bows have gotten better, bow hunter numbers are still growin' and those that bowhunt.....hunt. The numbers they take have to be included.

jcn59 ........don't get me wrong, and don't take this personal.  I ain't sayin' you're not a good hunter or that you fall into the same category as many of today's new hunters.....and I do agree with you that deer numbers are lower than they were 5 years ago. Odds are, you're more than likely a good hunter that's just frustrated and I can understand that.......but believe me, it could be worse. It used to be a lot worse, even back in the days when no does were taken legally. Again, we as hunters have more control over deer populations than the DNR. If we want more deer, we just have to shoot less. Too bad there isn't a "catch and release" for deer. Look at the quality of the states Musky fishery. Thirty years ago, catching a fish over 4' was rare on most waters. Now even tho the limits haven't changed much, and the numbers of musky fishermen has exploded, the numbers of large fish are higher than ever in most of the state's waters. This is because those fishermen don't kill every fish they catch like they used to. I believe this is what we have to do in the areas where we hunt. If we aren't seeing much for deer, we have to let 'em all walk. If we're seeing alot of deer we have to shoot some.......and if we want large deer populations, we have to be ready to pay something to the farmer who feeds the deer and we have to be ready to pay more for car insurance and carcass removal. The bottom line is economics. Like the song says, "ain't nuttin' in this life that's free".

[mirage1988]

Amen Buck460!
Another management tool that is absolutely ridiculous is earn-a-buck when deer numbers are low, now minn. is talking about doing it too for next year   Then you will have hunters that shoot a doe, donate it to the butcher, and go shoot a buck. I would rather see a statewide antler point restriction like missouri has of 4 points per side. We have very good deer habitat, but bucks here seem to get shot before they have a chance to grow good racks.

[Cheesehead]

I have been hunting deer in Northern Wisconsin since 1969 and have seen exactly the same trends that Buck460 speaks of. Deer sightings were rare in the 60's and 70's. The 80's and 90's spoiled us, I would see 10-40 deer a night from my bow stand. Years ago we HAD to drive deer to see any. Now people sit and wait for those nocturnal deer to move, and it does not happen.

Cheese

[jcn59]

Buck,  I'm not the 39 y.o. hunter I referenced. I turned 64 six months ago and started deer hunting in the early 1960s.

I hunt mostly alone these days, on foot, in the larger tarcts of public land in northern Wisconsin.   I have friends with heated elevated stands where I could hunt, but that's not the way I enjoy it.   So I know that my way is not the best way to fill a tag, nonetheless, I've been lucky enough to put lots of venison in the freezer.

As I recall, about one in ten hunters shot a buck in the early 1970s.  The last twenty years have been good to most of us deer hunters.

But!  I hunted herd control units in two or three counties last year and never saw a deer.  I hunted public land in units 9 and 12 this year and never saw a deer.  Despite these units being taken out of herd control this year,  the DNR put more doe tags on sale than anyone wanted to buy.  Don't get me started on deer losses to bears and wolves.

If you worked in private business, and your sales projections were off as much as the DNR estimates, you would be fired.   It doesn't make any difference how good you were "last year", what counts is NOW, and the DNR beaurocrats failed us.  AGAIN.   We need to get rid of the Madison blowhards now!

Incidentally Buck, your observations and thoughts on the last 40 years of Wisconsin pretty much parallel mine.

[mirage1988]

I hunt minnesota, not wisconsin, but we have the same idiots running the DNR like you do. Two years ago we had an early antlerless rifle hunt because there were too many does, this year most of minnesota was a lottery for doe tags. How could there possibly be such a difference in deer numbers in 2 years when there are the same number of hunters in the woods, shooting the same number of deer? The only way they can estimate the deer herd is by the past years harvest- last years harvest was low because opening weekend last year was so windy that the deer didn't move.

[Duckdog]

I live and grew up in NE WI and have been hunting the big tracks of woods my whole life, and I think the numbers are worse than in the 70's when I started hunting.  It's tough to even cut a deer track, but it sure aint hard to cut wolf and coyote tracks! 

I don't know where you guys are seeing all of the deer, but she's pretty tough sleddin' up where I am.  It will also be a cold day in he!! when I would pay a farmer not to collect crop damage, when that same farmer probably tries every way possible not to allow hunters on their land to hunt when we are already paying them damage through the State.

I think heads must roll in the DNR.  Remember... we are paying these bozzos' salaries! I read where the thought was to not replace the experience biologists with new ones... how could someone new do any worse?

I do not hunt in an elevated, heated stand.  I have never seen 20-40 deer in an opening day.  I have never sat on a bait. I have always managed to see deer by good old hard hunting, but that just don't work when there is not any deer to hunt.