wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
NRB, the voice of reason, unless you are trying to rape the resources of WI. Then apparently you are a thorn in the side.
How Will Gov Walker's Proposals Effect Sportsman
- Thread starter Terrific_tom
- Start date
Steve Bartylla
5 year old buck +
Good idea....No promises, but I'll talk to Dan about it tomorrow.
Terrific_tom
5 year old buck +
I have brought this up on several other outdoor forums that I visit and most of the Wisconsin guys on these other forums think this is no big deal and actually think it is a good thing. I can't believe that they are not alarmed about this.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
As much as we recreate to escape things like politics, it's impossible to escape how politics is shaping our outdoor recreation world and I don't think most realize this is happening to the degree it is.
huthut
5 year old buck +
The more research I do on the subject - the more I am not sure elected officials should not have oversight power and keep the NRB to make recommendations. The electorate of Wisconsin have no recourse with the NRB (long term govenor appointees). Still waiting for someone to make a strong case on how the NRB/DNR has done such a great job on the management of the deer hunting in Wisconsin. Remember deer hunting has gotten progressively worse - particularly on public grounds. Areas of Wisconsin that have good deer hunting - it is due to people like us on the forum who manage their land and don't fill all the cheap antlerless tags the NRB/DNR keep giving out.
Why shouldn't we change the status quo? A private enterprise would have changed direction along time ago.
Lets see some facts - Just saying something is bad doesn't make it so
Why shouldn't we change the status quo? A private enterprise would have changed direction along time ago.
Lets see some facts - Just saying something is bad doesn't make it so
shawnv
5 year old buck +
Go back to the mid 90's and see the issue then and how there was a need to return to independence of managing our natural resources. Notice what goups oppose doing do, big business.
We might not always agree with the NRB but it's much better than having to fight big business appointees.
We might not always agree with the NRB but it's much better than having to fight big business appointees.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
More on the latest http://www.outdoornews.com/February-2015/NRB-members-call-Walkers-plan-mistake/
If you value the input we can give at the spring hearings then this budget plan with diminish any value that has.
If you value the input we can give at the spring hearings then this budget plan with diminish any value that has.
Terrific_tom
5 year old buck +
There are many but I will give you just one. At present for DNR land to be sold it has to be Ok'd by NRB. If NRB gets turned into an advisory board the Govener will be able to sell any property he wants. This very thing will happen to a State Park in Sheboygan county if this goes thru it will be turned into a high priced golf course.
Last edited:
D
dipper
Guest
This is exactly the outcome walker wanted. He used a extremely emotional issue=deer, to gain politicial leverage and confidence. He saved us deer hunters, which really means squat to him, and conquered the big bad dnr.
Now the complete power grab, than comes the $$$$. $=more votes+more $$$$+ more power!
Pretty simple equation
Walker for sportsman!
Krause publications would never run a anti walker ad in deer and deer hunting mag, btw.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
I hunt strictly public ground now, and I am not willing to give up the checks and balances that the NRB provides over the exploitation of the natural resources of this state for any amount of Booner bucks running around on public land. I don't care if there is a 170" behind every tree. This is NOT just a deer hunting issue, it has ramifications far, far outside just the realm of deer and deer hunting.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
Anything printed should not be anti this person or that person and I would not ask that and I know that would not happen. I just want more people to be aware how this type of policy can affect hunters and why this policy is not good for the future of hunting or fishing.
huthut
5 year old buck +
No one said it was only a deer issue. Relax remove the emotions from the discussion -- Bold and underline is not helpful or productive. SAK is great? why and how? Show me how the NRB has fought the DNR to do the right thing based on citizen concerns? (bear hunting, fishing? spearing? Deer management? Bobcat?) The NRB is much closer to a rubber stamp for the DNR than a check and balance. Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program is awesome, but there has to be some limits to the amount of debt that the citizens of Wisconsin can take on from these purchases. Debt service of 1.6 Million per week is acceptable and letting it grow is acceptable ... make the case? Isn't it a good goal to reduce the debt service load of the DNR? Lets all figure out how to do it. Greater scrutiny in land purchases is a good thing. Remember as more land comes off the tax rolls those left owning land take on a larger tax burden.
DNR is distrusted by the public for a reason, so change needs to occur. There is middle ground on a lot of issues that can be found but that will need to be done without emotions and with some fiscal analysis.
D
dipper
Guest
Good luck with that Shawn, u should have voted for Mary Burke. I've given up on American politics. There is a lot more things rewarding in my life than caring.....
Haha no one trusts the dnr, but 90% of wi private forests are controlled by them for tax reasons. Oh wait-walker lowered my $8000 land tax by $200. He's the man!
Haha no one trusts the dnr, but 90% of wi private forests are controlled by them for tax reasons. Oh wait-walker lowered my $8000 land tax by $200. He's the man!
Steve Bartylla
5 year old buck +
Actually, they did, sort of. Dan came out strongly against the proposal to bring in Kroll, his report and the his 1st gutting of the WI DNR. He does a blog on their web site. I'm sure it can still be found there.
Here's what I didn't know until I just spoke to him moments ago. Those blogs ended up being used by Dems to show how "Walker wasn't for sportsman after all" and showed up on some liberal web sites, stating that the editor of D&DH is anti-Walker. Truth be told, Dan is FAR more conservative than liberal. Unfortunately, in today's politically toxic age, if you don't blindly support everything conservatives do (assuming that's "your" political leaning), you're labeled a traitor, RHINO or worse. The system has been rigged so that the days of being able to question anything "your" party does makes you deserving of a lynching, even something as simple as what shawn suggests in post #111.
After all the flack he got from those blog posts, Dan isn't sure how he could avoid being used by the libs and not making D&DH seem like it is anti-conservative, which it is not. Heck, the entire industry as a whole leans right, as well as the majority of D&DH readers.
To me, this sums up the biggest problem with politics today, and it's us. One can't even report on how they feel a program or actions will impact the state without being disdained by some of the supporters of that party. People only want Fox News or MSNBC to tell them what to believe. Everyone else is biassed or has some hidden agenda, unless they tell you exactly the same as which ever of those 2 propaganda machines one watches.
Steve Bartylla
5 year old buck +
Huthut,
Despite what we WI hunters may think, the WI DNR has always been held up as the gold standard of DNRs because, well, it frankly always has been. The NRB has always been an intricate part of creating that gold standard. They are the balance to the DNR.
Take something as simple as baiting. The WI DNR has desperately wanted to make baiting/feeding illegal for many years now, but the NRB has blocked it, stating public support for baiting and the income it generates as the basis. The NRB is the reason baiting isn't illegal throughout the state.
Now, you and I may wish it was illegal (I know I'd personally rather it was), but we'd be blind if we didn't see that the NRB has a point...May not agree, but they have a valid point.
With nearly every new Gov, the WI DNR is being turned more and more into a political arm of WI's Gov, and that trend has been put on steroids under Walker. The NRB is the counter balance, as they must approve any major rule changes for them to take effect. It forces the DNR to stay at least somewhat honest and tends strongly to look at the big picture, not just what is best for wildlife (see baiting as an example).
There are more than 1 or 2 in the WI DNR that want to make food plots illegal. With the NRB in place in its current fashion, that is essentially impossible. Without them, it becomes probable. Walker may not want this, but what about the next Lib Gov we elect, and, whether we like it or not, we will elect another Lib Gov in WI, it's just a matter of when. Let's say Walker does neuter the NRB, and it looks like he will succeed. Now, in the next election, Walker is either so damaged from a failed presidential run or actually won and he is no longer our Gov. We elect Tammy Baldwin (meant Mary Burke, but TB works as well to make the point), and she appoints her new DNR chief. Let's say Fox News is actually right and she really is out to take every gun from WI residents and wants to rely on plane drops of birth control pills for deer to control the population (just making this up, but it isn't as far fetched as many of the things I've heard on Fox News). Suddenly, without the NRB in place, whether Baldwin decides that food plots are illegal to hunt over or not just became the least of our concerns.
I do believe that the slashing of DNR research positions and neutering of the NRB is extremely short sighted. That said, I don't believe Walker is going to dismantle hunting in WI. If his history is to be impartially viewed, he's likely to use this as a path for some political payback, but we hunters will survive it and so will our deer herd. What about our next Lib Gov, though?!?!?!?!?! Do you trust him or her, now that they have complete control over our natural resources? Make no mistake about it. That is the cost of neutering the NRB. It hands a blank check to every Gov to come, with no balances in place. No matter what side anyone leans towards, the fact that we'll be handing that blank check to the other side eventually should make any serious outdoors fanatic extremely nervous. These Govs are not trained wildlife biologists. Heck, outside of pretending to go fishing and deer hunting on opening day, pitifully few even step into the woods.
In my mind, it all comes down to a simple questions. Do you believe every Gov to come from here on out will have WI sportsmen's best interests at heart or do you believe that "the other side" has insidious motives at times? If you believe the answers are yes and no respectfully, then support neutering the NRB. If you believe the answer is no and yes then this should probably make you extremely nervous.
Despite what we WI hunters may think, the WI DNR has always been held up as the gold standard of DNRs because, well, it frankly always has been. The NRB has always been an intricate part of creating that gold standard. They are the balance to the DNR.
Take something as simple as baiting. The WI DNR has desperately wanted to make baiting/feeding illegal for many years now, but the NRB has blocked it, stating public support for baiting and the income it generates as the basis. The NRB is the reason baiting isn't illegal throughout the state.
Now, you and I may wish it was illegal (I know I'd personally rather it was), but we'd be blind if we didn't see that the NRB has a point...May not agree, but they have a valid point.
With nearly every new Gov, the WI DNR is being turned more and more into a political arm of WI's Gov, and that trend has been put on steroids under Walker. The NRB is the counter balance, as they must approve any major rule changes for them to take effect. It forces the DNR to stay at least somewhat honest and tends strongly to look at the big picture, not just what is best for wildlife (see baiting as an example).
There are more than 1 or 2 in the WI DNR that want to make food plots illegal. With the NRB in place in its current fashion, that is essentially impossible. Without them, it becomes probable. Walker may not want this, but what about the next Lib Gov we elect, and, whether we like it or not, we will elect another Lib Gov in WI, it's just a matter of when. Let's say Walker does neuter the NRB, and it looks like he will succeed. Now, in the next election, Walker is either so damaged from a failed presidential run or actually won and he is no longer our Gov. We elect Tammy Baldwin (meant Mary Burke, but TB works as well to make the point), and she appoints her new DNR chief. Let's say Fox News is actually right and she really is out to take every gun from WI residents and wants to rely on plane drops of birth control pills for deer to control the population (just making this up, but it isn't as far fetched as many of the things I've heard on Fox News). Suddenly, without the NRB in place, whether Baldwin decides that food plots are illegal to hunt over or not just became the least of our concerns.
I do believe that the slashing of DNR research positions and neutering of the NRB is extremely short sighted. That said, I don't believe Walker is going to dismantle hunting in WI. If his history is to be impartially viewed, he's likely to use this as a path for some political payback, but we hunters will survive it and so will our deer herd. What about our next Lib Gov, though?!?!?!?!?! Do you trust him or her, now that they have complete control over our natural resources? Make no mistake about it. That is the cost of neutering the NRB. It hands a blank check to every Gov to come, with no balances in place. No matter what side anyone leans towards, the fact that we'll be handing that blank check to the other side eventually should make any serious outdoors fanatic extremely nervous. These Govs are not trained wildlife biologists. Heck, outside of pretending to go fishing and deer hunting on opening day, pitifully few even step into the woods.
In my mind, it all comes down to a simple questions. Do you believe every Gov to come from here on out will have WI sportsmen's best interests at heart or do you believe that "the other side" has insidious motives at times? If you believe the answers are yes and no respectfully, then support neutering the NRB. If you believe the answer is no and yes then this should probably make you extremely nervous.
Last edited:
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
No one said that the freeze on additional land purchases under Knowles-Nelson should not be curbed, that is a good and a very easily obtainable goal. Those incoming funds should be used to pay down that debt until it is negligible, then those funds should only be used to make purchases that can be bought outright or paid off within a 3 to 5 year span and with only money from the stewardship fund. Easy. Removal of NRB oversight is irresponsible and a complete and utter power grab for the party in control so they can do as they wish when it comes to regulation of the resources of this state. What gives you the idea that SAK is a product of the NRB? Sure, they allow it to continue to be used, but it has been stated in many independent studies and reports that it is the best thing going. And until someone, anyone, comes up with something better, with a proven track record of results that surpasses the data produced by SAK, then it should remain an integral part of deer management in WI. Not to mention that your DNR/NRB not doing anything about the deer situation is totally unfounded. We are in year 1 of a whole new rule system and management strategy dictated by the DTR report, the NRB is poised to vote on the permanent changes very soon. They are not "rubber stamping" the DNR's recommendations as you incorrectly pointed out, they have removed much verbiage that the DNR wanted to put into that rules package. So yeah, lets cut the throat of the one entity that can help move management forward in a responsible manner and is trying to do that right now, as we speak, and turn it over to puppet Cathy Stepp or maybe you propose we just bypass that as well and just turn control directly over to puppetmaster Scooter? Do you happen to own a mining company perchance? Because those and others like them are the only ones I see as thinking this is a good idea for the long term.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
They are already trying birth control in the East Coast burbs. One example...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-ny-town-using-birth-control-on-deer/7442121/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-ny-town-using-birth-control-on-deer/7442121/
shawnv
5 year old buck +
12/14- Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is today reporting that the state has spent $258,968 on costs related to a proposal from Gogebic Taconite, (GTac), but will not charge the firm for the expenses, which include gathering background data, meeting with county and federal agencies, alerting the public to information about the proposal, and developing rules and policies related to mining. The costs associated with the mining proposal, which are expected to rise significantly, were covered in part by revenue from hunting and fishing licenses.
If we do not change course, expect more of this.
If we do not change course, expect more of this.
