What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

User avatar
Centralwisconsinland
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:38 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Centralwisconsinland » Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:29 pm

Fish, You da Man!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Everyone has questions or concerns.  My question and concern is for the non-resident.  The non- resident that owns land in Wisconsin pays his/hers Wisconsin taxes and still pays full non resident fees.
Heaven help me, I am asking  your imput for a neighbor, who lives in Illinios, and is a Viking fan, this guy has nothing going for himself, except he is a good neighbor. What do you guys think about a non-resident, Wisconsin land owner.
It's easier to do a job right the first time than to explain why you didn't.

User avatar
bigwisconsinbucks
 
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:17 pm

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby bigwisconsinbucks » Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:36 pm

I agree with Goose and Fish on some of their views on the issue. I would eliminate the T-zone and EAB.
Also, I wouldn't have a rule for how much food plot land you could have. I would ban baiting as both Fish and Goose said.
 
But I disagree with having every deer tested in the CWD zones. This would really be a pain in the butt as I have had it done before and it wasn't fun. Most of the time you can see the symptoms of CWD and tell if the deer is sick or not.
 
I do agree with not having the governor pick the DNR board.
 
As far as license prices go they are high enough for in-state residents at the moment. However, the DNR shouldn't give out 4 free tags a day in the CWD zone and we should go back to hunters choice. If a hunter has over-population on his land, then he could purchase an antlerless tags for $20-25 each.Non-resident non-landowners license fees could be raised to around $300-350. However, the non-residents who own land should be given a break and pay less.
 
I strongly disagree with shooting hen turkeys in the spring. This could damage the number of turkeys significantly as many hens with nests could be killed. There are many turkeys in southern WI, but not nearly as many as there were 5 years ago. I think the coyote and the wet springs we have had have hurt the population. I however, do not see turkeys as big of a problem as some of you say on crops. Deer and coon especially are bigger crop damagers than turkeys IMO. I am a huge turkey hunter and would never consider having a small game license for turkeys. They are a great species to hunt and sometimes turkey hunting seems more exciting than deer hunting. I disagree with some of you saying that nobody hunts turkeys. Here in south-central WI there are many hunters and as the harvest numbers show, more and more people are hunting the birds.
 
Also, I would find a way to trim the wolf population. Maybe drop the poplation to 250 or less and have controlled hunting seasons on them. I would convince the Feds how dangerous wolves are and make them do something about it. We can't sit around and let the population climb over 1,000 with a good birthing season.
 
Phew- I think I'm done now. I know some of you will disagree with my points, but that is why we are on here discussing and brainstorming.
Kyle

schlupis
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:38 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby schlupis » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:05 pm

I like the idea of raising NR license fees to 300-350 but I would raise it for both NR and NR landowners doesnt matter to me NR is NR.
 
I would go back to hunters choice tags or just issue a buck tag and doe tag and thats it. No T-zone or EAB. No unlimited doe tags.
 
I would not regulate food plots and I would not do away with baiting. I do both.
 
I would love to be able to shoot wolves I dont like them in wisconsin there fine in Canada but not here.
 
I would not raise Resident tag fees.
 
I would like to see the bear draw system go to every 3 or 4 years for a Resident, no matter what zone you hunt.
 
I would keep the turkey season the same except maybe just being able to buy tags over the counter.
 
I would like ML to have its own tag you buy seperatly, your gun tag would not be valid, for ML, and make it a 4 day season.
 
 

User avatar
Fish
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:25 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Fish » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:10 am

Jeez, now I see how Warnke must feel.  First thing to address, as for any regulations, both the hunter and the state have to see equal benefit.
 
For Goose point/questions:By compensating the farmer, he is subsidized for crop damage but more importantly, for the use of his land.  Opening up private acres for nonland owners to hunt.  This would also weed out farmers taking Ag tags for the sake of shooting deer(fun) and not for what they are meant for(reducing his crop damamge).
 
Food plots are not natural to the deer habitat.  It is a step away from baiting.  Some land owner have more resources to plant these than others.  With technology, I'm sure new products would be made to drive deer into small areas, thus doing the same thing as a bait pile.  Also, the main goal is to get the deer back to their normal routine, moving for food, daytime movement.  One of our problem is not so much the lack of deer but the abnormal movement of deer along with high concentrations in small areas.  Natural grazing would make these deer move to all areas,  Hense, hunters seeing more deer.  Our deer have changed their habits, we need them to get back to normal.
 
ML season should be a seperate season, maybe a 4 day hunt in October where hunter can use bow and ML(like the western states).  ML is not as popular as gun or bow, but it is a big difference from gun/ more of a challenge.  A 4 day hunt, the week after gun, would also be good.  Saving deer is not the main objective, it is allowing hunting opportunities and giving the hunter more control of their deer herd is.
 
Nobody like license increases, I used a $10 increase for an example, $5 might be enough.  But remember, as head of DNR, I have to make both sides happy(not just the hunter).
 
Central, in my plan, I did mention non resident land owners would pay resident prices.  I did forget the rule that these non resident land owners MUST allow the DNR Czar hunting access. (it's great to be DNR Czar).
 
BigWIbucks,the CWD testing(using limph nodes) I believe is less of  a hassle.  The reason to test all the animals is really to shut up the CWD folks.  I don't believe CWD is a problem, it's a natural disease to deer but regardless, we're always going to have THAT group of people.  By sqashing that issue, we can finally get back to normal managing of the deer herd in the southern half of the state.
 
As said before, I shot from the hip on the turkey thing, we can buy turk tags OTC here in the S.  I guess as Czar, I would ask the CC and hunter what can be done to increase harvest and hunting interest in turkeys.  Or just let the Czar shoot hens in spring. 
 
If you read the information from the top wolf biologist, the DNR wants to reduce the population, we just can't.
 
I might be high on the doe tag price but the thought is to increase revenue along with making it a financial decision for the hunter.  Given free or $2 tags to shooters will only give them the urge to shot them for fun.  I don't have a problem with deer donation but when it encourages shooters to shoot for fun because they can, I have a big problem with that.
 
It's tough being DNR Czar.  You have to look at all sides, look at the financial and emotional aspect.  Both sides have to give a little to make a plan work.  We can't have all regs just make the hunter happy.
 
Mntman, I was kidding on the Paypal thing...... you can send a money order.  lol
 

User avatar
Goose
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:36 pm

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Goose » Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:05 pm

Farming has been with the deer since man, how can you say food plots are not natural? Food plots are great for deer and other wildlife. They improve the health of the deer and some supply cover as well. Yes not everyone can do it to the extreme as others but it should not be stopped because of that.
If its a bait/food plot issue thats another topic and there are major differences. Baiting is all about control, you put bait out and deer will come to it and its infinite as long as your wallet will allow. Food plots can face drought or to much rain and many other issues, you pretty much plant it and pray everything works out.Once the plot consumed the deer move on, with bait they buy another bag. You can put bait anywhere and draw deer in. If your neighbor puts alot of time in managing his land and doing the right things you could put out a pile of corn and reap all of his hard labor.
Then theres the disease issue from spreading diseases because of the close contact at bait piles to bait spoiling because of moisture and then the deer eating it. With food plots the deer are spread out and there are no spoilages with most crops.
Anyways I don't want to get into that argument.
Food plots are a great thing for all wildlife and are a good form of conservation. Why would you want to ban that? Its benefits far out weigh its cons. It seems that most of the others agree with this which is good. As DNR head maybe you need to start listening to us the hunters who spend time and sweat in the outdoors, we actually do know whats going on and maybe if you would get out of your office and spend some time with nature you would see that as well. LOL
ImageImage
Jake

Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....

DoeEyed
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:33 pm

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby DoeEyed » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:57 pm

I would ban baiting & feeding. Food plots are acceptable. As far as im concerned they are no different than cropland just not harvested. your time, your money, your land. do test maybe 1 in every 10 deer in cwd zones and surrounding area. regular bow & gun season w/ 1 doe tag & 1 either sex tag for each season. seperate 4 day muzzleloader in december w/ 1doe & 1 either sex tag. no t-zone or eab. $10 extra doe tags. resident license stays the same. non resident increase. would have turkey on small game license. could hunt 1 entire month in spring. 1st 2 weeks either sex...last 2 weeks no hens.

User avatar
Fish
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:25 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Fish » Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:20 am

Excuse me while I crawl into a hole and hide....with Warnke.  Goose, your rough, man.  But I never said outlaw food plots, just manage them.  If anyone would plant more than 1 acre of food per 40, well thats alot.  Hunters are geniuses when it comes to regs, rules and hunting.  Great example: Some states outlaw crossbow for hunting, so what do they do?  Make a contraption where you can keep your bow at full draw and just pull a trigger.  Kind of cool but not really what the croosbow rule was about.  Deer cane and stuff was made to attract deer where baiting is not legal, so the DNR had to change the rules.  I'm sure technology would enhance stuff to grow on a food plot, which would be more of an attractant.
 
I'm not at all against a food plot, have them on our land.  They are good for the wildlife, don't disagree.  The real reason for this rule is to get the deer back to their natural movement and feeding.  Do I think the number of deer are down, yes.  But I believe another reason we are not seeing the deer that we have in the past, is they have become nocturnal.  Why move during the day if they don't have to search for food.  So by limiting food plots, hunters have some advantage but the deer would still go back to their own patterns.
 
I remember back before food plot and baiting.  We could tell how good we'd do hunting on the acorn crop.  We have 200 acres of hardwood, mainly scrub oak up north.  Deer would travel through 100 acres from food to bedding areas.  Well, it all started of with a few pales of apples/corn.  Then neighbors caught on and used feeders, then came small food plots.  Now, we are up against neighbors planting 20 acre food plot using hybrid stuff.  Most of our acorns just rot now and absolutely no deer in the surrounding area.
 
Goose, I have to disagree with you.  Yes, farming is natural.  Extra food for deer...good.  But I know clover, alfalfa and chicory are not natural to our land in Marinette Cty and have never seen grow on our land.  I surely doubt Antler King Honey Hole, Imperial 30-06 Plus Protein, Max Attract, Buck n Bosses and Antler King Trophy Mineral seed/crops are natural to most of WI.  Let alone: ATV plow, seeders, sprayers and special fertilizers to enhance the growth.  Whats next, a seed that grows like a chia pet, were you can plant it in a 10x10 area that drive deer crazy?  Are we that far off? It's a slippery slope....
 
The main reason for the reg of food plot is to get the deer back in their natural pattern, so even if the deer herd is lower, we are still seeing deer move during the day.

User avatar
Goose
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:36 pm

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Goose » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:08 am

Fish- Ill agree with you on all that stuff not being natural but its certainly not the reason people are seeing less deer. I understand that you don't think food plots ruined hunting, I just really get in touch with nature by putting in food plots and just love seeing deer out in the fields all summer long eating the stuff that I had a hand in growing. Again I think food plots help deer alot more then it hurts hunting.
I also feel the reason people are seeing less deer (other than the fact there are less deer) is because people don't move them like they used to. This doesn't really effect bowing but gun hunting I think its a major factor in alot of areas. People want to keep "their" deer on their property. Just another contributing factor IMO.
Just giving you a hard time in my previous post, I enjoy your thoughts and passion for the deer herd. Thats why WI is so great because this hunting is in our blood.
Jake

Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....

User avatar
Centralwisconsinland
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:38 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Centralwisconsinland » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:58 am

Goose, I agree I get a kick out of watching deer eat what you have sown.  We do not have fields or open spots for food plots, but we have seeded the logging road.  I do not think that we have much over 1.5 acres seeded if that.  Fish, we always checked the acorn crop, if you were lucky enough to have a white oak as opposed to a red oak you had it made.  I believe, the hunting pressure that has been put on the herd has made them noctunal.  I have been out a couple of times after the t-zone season and after fresh snow.  I know one deer meandering through the woods can make a lot of sign, but I am plesantly surprise at the deer sign in my neck of the woods. I wish I could have been out today after the snow, but tomorrow will have to do. 
It's easier to do a job right the first time than to explain why you didn't.

User avatar
Fish
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:25 am

RE: What would you do if you were the head of the DNR?

Postby Fish » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:18 am

AH, HA!  Finally, I've heard a reason(it may not be a good reason).  I would like to take a look at one thing, "their" deer.  This is one of the main reason the DNR and WI has got into this mess.  Remember, I started this thread on the premise of knowing all of what I know from correspondence from the DNR, state officials, WU and biologist.  I'm trying to take objective action, making decisions to accomplish what all sides want.
 
Fact(from correspondence): The state has had a problem with deer management because hunters and nonhunters allowed numbers to get out of hand.  Perfect reason why we are up against EAB.  People treated deer as "their" commodity, feeding deer to keep them on their property, limited/ no hunting on the property.  Over population and CWD became the problem.
 
A perfect example near our land up north.  We, along with property owners saw very little during this year.  My relatives hunted on a large plot of land with very little hunting pressure during ML season.  They saw deer all over the place.  It was basically like a game farm, food plots and all.  Landowners own the land, the trees, etc....but they don't own the deer.  Everybody wants to have a bunch of deer on their land, so do I but what would I give up to have that.
 
Would you like to have a population of 1.2 million deer and in most areas, not see anything.  Or would you be happy with 900,000 deer and see 1-2 deer a day?  Deer not feed or living around a food plot/bait pile would move more to search for food.  Yes, maybe off your property but what would move on?  If your worried about that big one being shot on your neighbors property, well, good luck.  The big boys roam miles when they are in rut, your food plot is not going to help.
 
So the DNR Czar has heard the people, due to the huge objection in food plot regulations and concerns of deer density in certain areas, the following change will be made.  After we re-estimate population using the two models, in year 2, EAB will be inforced in units with high deer densities.  Remember, we have larger units now so if you don't have a huge food plot....better get planting.  Competition sucks.  Czar has spoken.
 
You wanted the opportunity to manage the herd but you objected to a reasonable limitation, which brought you back to the same major issue you had before.  This was the main purpose behind this thread.  We want everything our way, don't want to give something up.  Why do you think the DNR's attitude is always " Yeah, the hunters want this or that".  If you saw 15 deer a day, you'd want to see 20.  And I'm one of them, I haven't shot a doe in over 15 years.  Two bucks, plus 1-2 deer out west was enough venison for me per year.  I hate gutting out doe, I find very little pride in shooting one.  I have 12 heads on the wall and am looking for number 13.  But now I have to EAB and can't.
 
Do I think the DNR is wrong, obsolutely.  But when I look at things objectively, we must give to get.  The DNR has a whale of a job, nothing is ever "right".  If we want a good hunting and to manage the herd, we ALL must do the right things.  Proper buck/doe ratio, proper deer densities on our land, selective harvest of doe.  If that means you have 4 doe and 2 bucks on a 40, take 1 buck and two doe.  Not just be happy with 1 or both bucks.  If we can't, the DNR has to.
 
 
 

PreviousNext

Return to Wisconsin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests