gwm
5 year old buck +
For those that are interested, the 2016 spring CDAC meetings are a couple weeks away.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/cdac.html
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/cdac.html
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
You might want to head over to the Juneau meeting and politely suggest that the CDAC members actually show up for the meetings, unlike the final quota setting meeting from last fall that over half the CDAC members missed, so no quorum could be reached to lower the permit numbers in the Central Forest Zone portion of the county, even though that is what the public attendees were requesting.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
BTW gwm, I didn't mean to sound like I was putting anything on you in particular, but what happened last fall cannot be allowed to happen again if we want the deer numbers to increase in any reasonable time frame. I know you are in the Farmland Zone portion of the county as well, but nothing would have changed there either, even if the public would have requested it.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
If I can get out of work early enough to make it down there from LaCrosse, I would love to go. I know at least 2 of the Committee members very well from all the years I lived in New Lisbon. I also wouldn't mind chatting with CO Matt Weber, I haven't talked to him in a few years. Hatch Library is the new-ish one they built in the middle of downtown a few years back, correct? If so, it is literally 3 blocks from my FIL's house, but I'm not sure on that, as I don't go to Juneau Co to browse the new book club selections, lol!
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
I see this as no different than running a QDM coop. If you are in a coop with your neighbors and want more deer, you get together and voice your opinions on the matter and decide on what and how many to harvest. This is very similar, just working on a county wide scale, along side the DNR and other stakeholders. You all get together and voice opinions on what was seen in the field, compare data, and then make informed decisions on antlerless quotas based on factors like whether you would like to see more or less deer in your area, getting more opportunity to put a deer in the freezer, and possibly even growing older and larger deer. Keep in mind that the DNR has already said that things like APR's(not that I am endorsing them in any way) are not out of the question in individual Counties/Zones, if that is the direction that the majority in the County/Zone may want. :(Bad part of that whole thing is that Coops are a PIA to get off the ground and get any type of consensus as to decisions on what is best for the group.:( That said, if you hear a neighbor complaining, tell them to get their @$$es out to those meetings and voice their opinions. I have a kind of a hard-a$$ stance on this since the initial meetings and moving forward, anyone I hear b!tch!ng after the meetings about the rules or deer numbers, I call them out on whether they attended or not, if they keep b!tch!ng, I keep pointing out that they did not attend the meetings until they shut up about it or start attending.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
As far as Coop's What I've found is that you cannot shove idea's down people's throats. I think you can come to a consensus that you all at least want a healthy heard, one that is not too high or too low so have that as your foundation. Some many want to shoot younger bucks (it's nice to know what everyone's goals are) but you may get them to buy into habitat improvements (like cutting mature hardwoods) that will benefit the herd in the big picture. Having regular meetings that share all of the big buck sightings and pictures helps put the idea in the back of their mind and maybe if they think there is a big one around they will show some trigger restraint.
We are going through that right now where my farm is and we'll be the third year into it. I would say we're seeing progress in deer numbers and quality so while not perfect it's certainly better than the alternative.
I think meeting attendance is something many get caught up in with other activities or the don't think about it soon enough. Same can be said for school board, township, county meetings and etc.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Glad to see your making at least some progress with the neighbors shawn. As far as all the "meetings" go, I do the same in the case of those types of meetings as well. B!tch about the School Board decision? Did you attend the meeting? No, then shut the h3!! up! Decision at the Town Hall meeting got you up in arms? Did you attend the meeting? No, then shut the h3!! up! Just sick of the complaining and not having the ambition to go and speak up for yourself attitude that most folks have anymore. I guess I'm just turning into an ornery old b*$t*rd these days, my wife surely thinks so.
The antlerless tag quotas or herd size goal for each unit is set on a 3-year cycle. However, the CDAC runs on an annual cycle, with each year segmented into 3 periods...Spring meetings are 1 period in the annual cycle and are a lot of the "results" of the other 2 periods of monitoring (spring/summer fawn counts, and fall hunter monitoring) and review of DNR herd metrics data like winter severity, survival and harvest numbers. But a big part of the meetings is hunter, hunt club and general public feedback.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
This works very similar to what mt has stated above with a few corrections in the process he described. The "Increase", "Maintain", and "Decrease" population designations for each County/Zone are set every 3 years. Antlerless tag quotas are set annually each spring. Preliminary yearly antlerless tag quotas for Counties are set each year during the early spring meeting based on kill data and other metrics from the previous season, including current winter severity. The preliminary quota recommendations are then sent out for public review and comment. The second spring meeting is to "finalize" the antlerless quotas for the coming fall season. Those CDAC quota recommendations are then reviewed by the NRB during their May meeting, along with the DNR recommendations, and then the tag quota numbers are approved by the NRB. The summer and fall meetings are to monitor the progress of fawn recruitment and any associated crop damage issues that should arise. During the early fall meetings, in "emergency situations", any major issues that came up during the post-fawn period can be discussed and emergency quota changes could be sought based on overly high crop damage claims or other circumstances. This would be in rare and extreme circumstances only. Additional NRB approval would be needed to make any changes after the May NRB quota number approvals. This is why it is important to attend the spring meetings EVERY year! The fall meetings every third year are the ones where the Increase, Maintain, Decrease "population goals" are set for the forthcoming 3 year period, and the quotas for the next season are set the next spring based on those new "goals" and all the other metrics. Keep in mind, this years antlerless tag quota allocation in each County "could" be completely different from the previous fall.
Thanks for the correction. I guess I overlooked or didn't realize that the antlerless tags were set annually. But that makes sense to try to keep on-track towards the 3-year herd size goal.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
With the mild winter we have had this year, I can surely see them wanting to raise the tag quota allotment in most areas based on next to zero winter severity. If your areas numbers are still on the low side and your area is in an "Increase" goal mode(like the Juneau Co Forest Zone), I would still try to fight any and all attempts to raise the tag allotment. If you can't attend the meetings personally, at least be prepared to get your voice heard during the public survey/comment period after the preliminary numbers come out from the first meeting and the second spring meeting in mid-April when the quotas are finalized and then sent to the NRB. If you have a real beef, don't be afraid to contact the NRB members directly through email, they are all willing to hear you out and welcome public comment.
Similar threads
