2016 WI Spring CDAC Meetings

[Tree Spud]

So then you agree that 20-25 dpsm is an adequate number of deer to allow for a reasonable chance at harvest. Having stated that, please explain why we need 40+ dspm and why hunters are all pi$$ed off that the DNR would want it lower?

I think that is more like a communist dictatorship, but whatever. The point is, if that is what it takes to get guys to wake up and smell the coffee, then so be it. I'm betting my bottom dollar that if it happened once, the hunters would do everything in there power to prevent it from happening again, don't you think?

I understand what you are saying about the first year thing, problem is, the DNR/NRB doesn't care. They are saying get it right or give it up, thus the reason for the harsh rules they are proposing. The DNR/NRB does not have the patience you are asking for, nor will they, because the NRB is especially afraid that this will set future precedence on these matters and they cannot and will not allow that to happen, they said last year already that they would nip this type of behavior in the bud in no uncertain terms.

As I said, if everyone just plays the game at a high level and does what needs to be done in each individual area, this is not a bad system. Low density areas lay off the antlerless and high density areas increase the take. Someone tries to play outside the "rules" and they are not going to like the outcome, much like now. The NRB wants the hunters to have the say to put a stop to the overkill issues the DNR has imposed on us in the past, they really do, but we cannot take that to the other extreme either, as they are just as unlikely to allow that to happen, if not more so.

If 20-25 dpsm is the new norm, I think a number of things will happen in areas like ours...

Predators will have a more detrimental impact on a smaller population. Given the same number of hunters, hunting pressure will be immense most likely leading to neighbor issues and calls for baiting.

Mature deer of 3.5 yo or older will be almost non-existent. If Ag tags still exist then who knows what will happen to the population?

As hunter success rate and satisfaction start to drop, we will start to lose hunters and new hunter recruitment will be difficult. This will then affect license sales.

"Having stated that, please explain why we need 40+ dspm and why hunters are all pi$$ed off that the DNR would want it lower?"

Your own words answer that question. If the CDACs do not fall in line with what the DNR wants, then they will disregard their input and override them. I also question the 20-25 dspm because many feel it is more driven by the Insurance & Farming lobby than by what realistic carrying capacity supports.

Explain to me where the DNR is building trust?

.

 

[shawnv]

My area in Western WI was back up from having less than 15dpsm in the fall of 2013 to what is now low to mid 20's dpsm. As it turns out there were more B&C class bucks running around here last year than some of the beast areas in the country.

 

[wiscwhip]

Tree, I have hunted in an area where 20-25(again, pre-fawn numbers) was commonplace for most of the years I have hunted. Sure we had more than that during the heyday's, but I don't think we will ever see those numbers again anyway. I have not experienced any noticeable increases of the additional issues you are stating(not saying in areas with higher traditional populations will not have those issues, just stating that when those lower numbers are the norm, those are small issues at best), back when we owned land there for 25+ years or now that we hunt only public ground. If guys are baiting in a zone where it is illegal, they should be called in. Ag tags should not be needed if the population is already in check at those lower numbers, so that issue should be lessened. It also seems like we have as many hunters as ever, even though the population is down below 20 right now, so the hunter recruitment issues don't seem to be affecting our area. I agree that predators could be an issue, especially in the case of wolves which cannot currently be controlled.
Keep in mind that when you talk about the CDAC's falling in line and trust of the DNR, we really don't need to worry about that as much anymore, we need to be worried about the Natural Resources Board, they call the final shots on all of this. CDAC's recommend numbers and the DNR recommends numbers to the NRB, they decide which route to go for the final quotas. I think it is more important to be engaged with the NRB than with the DNR itself.

 

[bueller]

public comments are now posted

 

[Tree Spud]

Just read them ... Marquette county is clearly going the way of Waupaca Cty. We are in the top 3 highest dpsm counties and many folks are complaining there are no deer. One guy in the public comments claimed 3 hunters hunted 3 different properties and only saw one deer all season ... really? How can the DNR take that type of response seriously?

This also reinforces my contention that more doe tags & free doe tags will have no impact on herd reduction. The will need to be some type of doe harvest requirement prior to a buck tag.

 

[wiscwhip]

^^^ Yup, and they can rant and rave all they want, May 23-24th will be the true test. 900 may have replied via the internet survey for the Waupaca meeting, and they may have 1,000+ in the gym tomorrow night, but I wonder how many will travel to Madison to attend the NRB meeting in May when the "real" goal setting takes place?

 

[wiscwhip]

BTW NoFo, in case you didn't see my post on QDMA, since all the other guys in Waupaca Co apparently have numbers like the guys in central MN:rolleyes:, I am blaming you for this mess up there.;);):D Especially given the fact that not one of them seem to be acceptant of any blame for any of this on there parts.

 

[Tree Spud]

Just read all 71 pages of the Waupaca public input. FYI, Waupaca had 916 hunters respond vs. Marathon county(same harvest totals) had 91 respond, 7 pages.. The Waupaca respondees voted 800-100 not in favor of a doe only season. Many guys claim they have few deer at all. The Waupaca gym Tuesday will make a Trump rally look like an ice cream social.

Marquette Cty had 72 people fill out a survey and 24 submitted comments.

39 of the 72 said there were fewer does sighted than in 2014 ... too much Blackberry brandy I believe blurring their vision.

 

[wiscwhip]

I saw that. Lol. I just cant believe how many guys spent 23 days hunting waupaca and saw 10 deer all season? Deer mgmt is easy hunter mgmt makes me want to stick an ice pick in my ear. Imagine the dnr trained biologist listen to Cletus who dropped out of 8th grade talk about deer dynamics?

I can imagine the eyerolls and headshakes from your boy as he read all those comments, just thinking about it makes me laugh, as sad as the reality of it is.

 

[Tree Spud]

[QUOTE="Novemberforever, post: 103744, member: 57

7)Consistently easier winters than in the 70's when i had to walk uphill, both ways to school.

[/QUOTE]

Funniest line I have heard in a while ... I'm gonna borrow that one! :)

 

[bueller]

comment on #2 of NoFo's list. I think it's far from coincidence that less than 3% of the land in Waupaca County is open to public hunting and Waupaca County has overpopulation issues. In comparison the forest zone in Juneau County has 38% of the land open to public hunting. Issue the permits and public land hunters will shoot deer. Private land hunters, not so much.

 

[Tree Spud]

I have put much thought into how Waupaca county has become the highest dpsm on the planet and why. Some back history, 1949, my neighbors Dad took the first archery kill in the county. Hardly any deer there. The 60's-early 70's brought us party doe tags(arm bands), most camps like us had a strict never shoot a doe mentality while any legal buck was down. The goal was to fill every buck tag by day 3 and we did. I have a meatpole pic of 27 bucks/27 hunters. So what factors have contributed to the explosion of deer and insane dpsm the last 40 years?

1) Foodplots- The acreage today is exponential to what anyone was doing 40 years ago which has artificially raised the cc.

2)Big time restricted access.Big $$$ has found Waupaca for great private deer/turkey hunting besides growing 200 inch bucks. What has this done? Big chunks of habitat have been bought up. When any 10-20-40 acre adjoining piece comes available it gets snatched up by the big $$ who will pay $$5k/acre for hardwoods. Many of these 20-40 acre pieces had 2-6 hunters working it hard. Now that piece is 1 hunter, or a sanctuary or a buffer. Heck for decades my east wire had 19 guys hunting the heck out of 120 acres for 4 months. Family feud, It was sold 2 years ago and now 2 hunt it. Back in the day you could get permission. Now, you get permission for $40/acre lease.

3) Hornporn- More and more camps now are all about megabuck hunting. Do nothing to disturb/bump that buck. Let the neighbors kill the doe.

4) Coyote hunting has become much more efficient.

5)Habitat work like ns thermal bedding/apple/pear trees, ect Hardwoods decimated with no understory to protect fawns? No problem, create a tent city in 6 years with ns.

6)skewed definitions of what QDM is. Guys fly the QDM banner and it typically means raise the dpsm as high as possible and take the bucks i want.

7)Consistently easier winters than in the 70's when i had to walk uphill, both ways to school.

8)Equipment, clothes, ect. enable guys to stay out all day comfy, vs. freezing by 9am, this is no fun, quick kill a deer and get in the cabin.

9) Many of the long distance big $$$ land owners don't care or want to deal with processing too many deer.

Many factors are and will continue to feed this beast.

NoFo ... You just hit a triple double with that post. I would try an add, but you pretty much summed the situation up very well.

Guys pretending to be QDM who are really TDM = don't shoot that doe 'cause you might bump that trophy buck.

The question is, how do you reverse this trend to establish more reason dpsm & herd balance?

.

 

[Tree Spud]

comment on #2 of NoFo's list. I think it's far from coincidence that less than 3% of the land in Waupaca County is open to public hunting and Waupaca County has overpopulation issues. In comparison the forest zone in Juneau County has 38% of the land open to public hunting. Issue the permits and public land hunters will shoot deer. Private land hunters, not so much.

Bueller ... you make an interesting point which many have been claiming as an issue. If only 3% of land is open to public deer hunting, how are private land owners going to swarm that land to get their does?

I mean these grounds will only accept so much pressure before the deer disperse elsewhere ...

.

 

[wiscwhip]

I'll bring 10 Juneau Co woodcutting rednecks up there, complete with AR's, you guys get me permission to make drives on all the trouble properties with browse issues and any adjacent landowners, and we'll have those numbers under control faster than a top fuel drag run.;) :D bueller knows of what I speak!

EDIT: There are some pretty big parcels up there, I'll bring 20, just for the larger sections.

 

[BJE80]

NoFo ... You just hit a triple double with that post. I would try an add, but you pretty much summed the situation up very well.

Guys pretending to be QDM who are really TDM = don't shoot that doe 'cause you might bump that trophy buck.

The question is, how do you reverse this trend to establish more reason dpsm & herd balance?

.

My guess is they are so used to the high DSPM that they won't want to go back. Otherwise that is "Bad hunting"

 

[wiscwhip]

Hit it right on the head Brad!

 

[bueller]

I'll bring 10 Juneau Co woodcutting rednecks up there, complete with AR's, you guys get me permission to make drives on all the trouble properties with browse issues and any adjacent landowners, and we'll have those numbers under control faster than a top fuel drag run.;) :D bueller knows of what I speak!

EDIT: There are some pretty big parcels up there, I'll bring 20, just for the larger sections.

That would be a blast, I'm in !!!!!

 

[wiscwhip]

I don't have an AR, but I do still have a few 10 round clips laying around for my 742. :eek:

 

[bueller]

Deer drives on private property are a thing of the past. Heck you could say that about most public lands now. Like them or not drives were/are an effective way of killing deer. And a Wisconsin tradition dating way back.

 

[wiscwhip]

Of course. I pull my boat every July 13 hours into Ontario to catch 100 fish/day and it's never been in any local state waters. Tell a Waupaca 40 owners he should only have 3 deer in his woods? That's the magic message being relayed at tonights lynch mob, i mean townhall cdac meeting.

C'mon pope! 3 deer on a 40! That's still 48 dpsm! The DNR wants to see more like 3 on an 80.