2009 Wisconsin Hunting

[cschauf]

I dont feel "entitled" to a deer just for buying a tag. And I dont think any hunter feels that way. However, as stated on the DNR's website, when they are considering herd management goals that they consider all interested partyies and factors. Including the hunters. One can easily argue that the hunter's interests are not being considered or taken as serious as others.

[Dan Salmon]

There are 5,627,967 people that live in the state of Wisconsin. There were 638,040 total gun licenses sold or 11% of the population.

So, yes, you could say that deer hunters being the minority in the wrestling for the DNR's attention are being short changed.

I guess that I'm thinking there are better ways of trying to change things than playing the unfair card. Somehow, these organizations that are funded by hunters, Whitetails Unlimited, WI Deer Hunters Association, etc. need to pony up some money and have some scientific research done that can refute without a doubt the stance and policies of the DNR. Only with sound scientific data do you have any grounds for opposition other than just being mad because you aren't seeing deer.

You can keep showing them the trends of deer vehicle accidents, etc. This doesn't do anything to them other than to strengthen their stance that what they have been doing is working. Hunters need an advocate that can produce real numbers, based on science, that states what the carrying capacity of the habitat is, what the social population should be set at etc. until that happens, all we are doing is complaining.

It's funny to me that a lot of folks throw their money to organizations like Whitetails Unlimited, etc. and in blind faith believe they are out there working for them. But in reality these organizations are out there voting for the alternative seasons, EAB, etc. The guys everyone thinks are helping them are really throwing them under the bus and then come asking for more money the next year.

It's simply amazing!!

[Goose]

Good post Dan.
 
I agree that a person has to and should know what they are sticking their money into.

[Washburn]

ORIGINAL: Dan Salmon
Only with sound scientific data do you have any grounds for opposition other than just being mad because you aren't seeing deer.

Hunters need an advocate that can produce real numbers, based on science, that states what the carrying capacity of the habitat is, what the social population should be set at etc. until that happens, all we are doing is complaining.

Amen Brother Dan!

[green bay]

Dan,
I couldn't agree more except for the fact that the DNR when presented with hard scientific as well as physical evidence from Wings over Wisconsin in the 80s that the pheasant population could make a strong come back through a hatch and release program created by Wings over Wisconsin we were simply told it can't be done and our voices were no longer heard.

[umpiremark]

My son and I have hunted the same private 120 acres for the past 15 years in 54C. I personally have been hunting deer in WI since 1971. This past season, my son and I bow hunted every weekend from Sept 30th through the gun season. In all those "sits" this year, my son and I saw nine deer - total. We moved stands, interpreted cam photos and sign and ever changed our methods and strategies. Nine ... nine total deer.

As lucky as we can be, one of those nine was a forked buck my son shot with his bow and I shot the only deer I saw all gun season - a heavy racked buck. BUT, for all those hours, scouting and moving stands, we saw nine deer total. Five hunters in camp for gun season we saw three deer total. And we're all good, successful hard hunters. Success in the past is greatly overshadowed by the lack of sightings this year. A sad trend that has been getting worse every year since 2000.

My question for the DNR of WI is this ... in 2000, hunters (bow and gun) killed over 618,000 deer and the herd was estimated at 1.4 - 1.7 M deer. What ... exactly what ... was the downside to that many deer in WI? If car crashes and crop damage and winter kill has been reduced only slightly by greatly reducing the WI deer to this year's levels, then what is the harm of keeping the herd at 1.4-1.7M?

Until the DNR can answer that question "accurately" without excuses, I will listen. Until then, the DNR can shut up.

This was by far the worst year in 15 on that property, despite that my luck put venison in my freezer.

[cschauf]

Dan, I totaly agree with you on most of what you are saying. The "unfair card" as you called it is only one tool or resource that we as hunters can use. I personally wouldnt call it that. I would say that it more like calling a spade a spade. We do need more data but as hunters/taxpayers in the state of WI, and the DNR a state agency, isnt it our right to call them out as we would anyone  else we thought was blowing smoke up your you know what?

Good example - The DNRs formula for density estimates for a DMU is "based largely on the number of antlered bucks harvested in the unit. So, they tell is we have a huge deer herd, shoot more deer please. We do, and record or near record deer kills are recorded for several years. What does that do to their herd size estimate?
Well, if you follow their formula, it means the more you kill the more you have so then the EAB units come in to play. This is just ONE of the things the I feel needs to change. The way that they estimate the population!


As I have said before - all it really boils down to is that some things have to change. The status quo isnt making too many people happy. And really the only way things are going to change is if we contact our state reps. Most of what the DNR does is state law. So, to change things, we need the laws to change.

[cschauf]

I appreciate your comments Dan. The figures I presented were just a sampling of what has been going on for the past few years. Not meant to be anything more than that. I agree, there is a lot more data that needs to be prepared. One piece of data I would like to have is the number and locations of car/deer collisions over the past 10 years or so. But, you have to compare that to the number of drivers on the road too. And compare it to the estimated deer population per location (DMU). I suppose you could get pretty accurate resident total numbers but it would be difficult to get accurate numbers for drivers on the road from out of state I think. It would be interesting to see those statistics. I have personally noticed a pretty significant drop in the numbers of dead deer on the road in my area.
 
I have heard of some states using deer deterrant fencing. Does anyone have any knowledge of how that is working?