Deer Czar Recommendations?

[retch sweeny]

WBH has gone a long way to create more opportunities for bowhunters but with the different seasons there has to be some concessions made.

And lots and lots of concessions have been made by the bowhunting community. But to some its not been enough. Now there is a question on the spring hearing to strip the antlerless tag from the archery deer license. That came from a CC delegate who just so happens to be the presedent of the new group called "Wisconsin Crossbow hunters"

[retch sweeny]

Ok, I heard some scoop from some close to the Deer Czar. Susposedly some of his recommendation are going to be:

1. Start over the the deer estimating system. He is very critical to the DNR processes and their understanding the size of the deer herd.

2. Start over with the registration system - I love this one personnally, hope it is true

3. Start over with the rules book. He said there are too many bolt on rules and in collection it is a mess and needs a complete overhaul.

4. He is not impressed with some of the DNR staff - rumor is there will be blood at end of this

5. Move the deer management to a county by county basis. Get rid of deer management units.

The guy I talked to said the real question is Walker. He has been wounded by the re-elections

Can you name your source?? It would lend credibility to the claims.

[bullwinkle]

No, we will find out in a month. No reason to go down that path.

It makes sense what he said, someone has to bring some common sense to this situation. Dr Deer may be the leader we needed. Could you imagine if for example Shawano County wanted to implement antler restrictions and improve land values, this setup could allow for that!! I hope it is true

[retch sweeny]

So you are sticking to your story that you have gotten leaked information about the recommendations that Dr. Kroll is coming out with. Is that correct?

[Ostermann]

I think the bow season is fine. Actually met someone who shot a buck during the gun season. Pretty impressive.

If crossbow is introduced, maybe start it like 1 October or something. That gives them an opportunity to participate.

Not a big fan of DNR APR. If landowners get together and work on some type of QDMA, that is fine. However, you start dictating how big a buck has to be, that may be a little much. Not everyone has unlimited time, resources, land, to have someone say what you can or cannot shoot. EAB is not always a favorite as well but it does protect bucks to a degree. However, hard to swallow that I can't shoot a buck if it's the only deer I see.

[bullwinkle]

Leaked is too strong. All this is is a guess from some people that are close to this. I would guess these are directionally correct but I am sure they are not secrets, remember the Czar works for us - we are paying him something like $200K for this report with our tax dollars. The points make sense.

You know I have been thinking. Land owners should vote by county for the deer rules. For every acre of recreation land you own you get 1 vote. (if you own 40 acres, you get 40 votes) The public gets to vote to but their vote only counts for the acres of public land in the county. Some counties are very close to changing the game and letting deer age. It should be up to the landowners on the rules not the public. In northern Wis where there is a lot of public lands, the public will rule. Think about that idea

[bullwinkle]

Leaked is too strong. All this is is a guess from some people that are close to this. I would guess these are directionally correct but I am sure they are not secrets, remember the Czar works for us - we are paying him something like $200K for this report with our tax dollars. The points make sense.

You know I have been thinking. Land owners should vote by county for the deer rules. For every acre of recreation land you own you get 1 vote. (if you own 40 acres, you get 40 votes) The public gets to vote to but their vote only counts for the acres of public land in the county. Some counties are very close to changing the game and letting deer age. It should be up to the landowners on the rules not the public. In northern Wis where there is a lot of public lands, the public will rule. Think about that idea

[kellory]

You would end up with syndicates and tyranny. Just like from Obama's speeches" from those according to their abilities, too those according to their needs." It leaves no protection for the weaker side, just the power of numbers. Deals would be struck, clubs formed, and power blocks running the show by decree. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Clubs would buy acres to increase power, any scrub tract that would qualify. Individuals would lose control of hunting on their own lands, as the rules would be set by the deepest pockets. Deep pockets are destroying hunting for the little guys now on farms as companies buy up leases and force out any other hunting as perks for visitors, or company rewards. Why should a farmer allow hunting for the asking, or small fee, or work, when they can get several thousand dollars for the same rights from one source, and they may not even show up? It is money in the bank, and all they need do for it is reserve the right to hunt from anyone else? No. Deep Pockets have too much control of hunting now. It sounds good on the surface, but look beyond the surface to the likely, and the unlikely, then view the possible. Never settle for the possible, that is where loopholes, exclusions, exemptions, and mandates come from. Don't open that door.

[retch sweeny]

You would end up with syndicates and tyranny. Just like from Obama's speeches" from those according to their abilities, too those according to their needs." It leaves no protection for the weaker side, just the power of numbers. Deals would be struck, clubs formed, and power blocks running the show by decree. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Clubs would buy acres to increase power, any scrub tract that would qualify. Individuals would lose control of hunting on their own lands, as the rules would be set by the deepest pockets. Deep pockets are destroying hunting for the little guys now on farms as companies buy up leases and force out any other hunting as perks for visitors, or company rewards. Why should a farmer allow hunting for the asking, or small fee, or work, when they can get several thousand dollars for the same rights from one source, and they may not even show up? It is money in the bank, and all they need do for it is reserve the right to hunt from anyone else? No. Deep Pockets have too much control of hunting now. It sounds good on the surface, but look beyond the surface to the likely, and the unlikely, then view the possible. Never settle for the possible, that is where loopholes, exclusions, exemptions, and mandates come from. Don't open that door.

OK braveheart, you can calm down now. What the hell was that? Too funny.

[retch sweeny]

Leaked is too strong. All this is is a guess from some people that are close to this. I would guess these are directionally correct but I am sure they are not secrets, remember the Czar works for us - we are paying him something like $200K for this report with our tax dollars. The points make sense.

LOL at "Guess" and "Close to this" So its was all made up B.S. as I suspected. Epic fail.

By the way, his team is paid $125,000. And we are supposed to believe your unnamed source when you cant even get public info correct.

This just in......... A guy I know who knows a guy that is close to this just told me, The good doctor will recommend we all wear bunny suits while deer hunting. No really. I cant tell you how I know or who told me. Lets not go down that road.