wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Hopefully they don't get all sketchy like MN and change the old data on the map to fall in line with the new recommendations.
CDAC Meeting Tonight
- Thread starter Terrific_tom
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cdac
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Apparently they have a bunch of idiots on their CDAC team! This is the precise reason why the state will side with the DNR reps instead of the CDAC Committee Teams. This is likely happening in other high density counties in the state as well. Unrealistic and unsafe for the deer herd to want to keep numbers that high. When they end up with CWD everywhere they will all stand around with there d!ick$ in their hands b!tch!ng to the DNR to fix it!:mad: Be realistic and don't try to stick it to the state and they may be more forthcoming and acceptant of the CDAC team recommendations.
bueller
Moderator
Clark County forest area will be interesting. Their CDAC was split between increase and maintain and ended up going with maintain. They are the only CDAC in the central forest not recommending an increase. My guess (or should I say hope) is that the entire central forest, including clark county, will end up being designated for an increase.
shawnv
5 year old buck +
My 30 acres is Central Forest Zone but it's on the edge of farmland, we're going to see some Waupaca type deer numbers if the status of increase stays and we have some mild winters. I do realize most of that region is country forest ground that could use a few more deer.
M
MoBuckChaser
Guest
It could be!
Terrific_tom
5 year old buck +
Another thing that the DNR biologist said at the Manitowoc meeting was that if there is an extreme amount of crop damage in a county that the Natural Resource Board would change the reccomendation and could put a doe only season into effect.
B
bat man
Guest
At least he received a real answer.
bueller
Moderator
From all the reading that I've been doing it seems that crop damage and over browsing of forests carry heavy weight in deciding whether a CDAC votes to increase, maintain, or decrease the herd. Thankfully in the Juneau County Forest neither of these seem to be much of an issue, even with the DNR Forester there. Unlike the Clark County forester who IMO swayed that CDAC vote from increase to maintain because of his fear that the forest will be over browsed if they vote to increase.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
That's a good thing, I won't be as inclined to punch him in the mouth. Many of the NRB members hold Forestry degrees, and I think in the event the conversation turns to overbrowsing, you are correct that they will vote for lower numbers, as opposed to any increases. Although, as a CDAC Committee member, I would call out the local Forester rep on it and have him do a sight visit or 2 with me and whatever other members wanted to go along to show me this browse pressure before I didn't put up a stink about the number being lowered. Real evidence needs to be presented, not his desk jockey recommendation. Otherwise, they will just continue to play this card over and over. That gives me another item I will be putting in my next round of emails to the NRB reps, "If recommendations are not to be followed, proof of the reason for the change must be made evident through on site visits to the members of the Committees". Thanks for the idea bueller!
Last edited:
gwm
5 year old buck +
Juneau County Meeting:
Central Forest Zone = Vote was to increase and the recommendation from all three DNR staff in attendance (wildlife liaison, warden and forester) was also to increase.
Central Farmland Zone = Vote was to maintain. The DNR wildlife liaison and forester recommended to maintain and warden recommended to increase.
There was about 25-30 people at the meeting and everyone that hunted the Central Forest Zone voted to increase and there was a pretty much 50-50 split between maintain and increase on the Central Farmland Zone.
Central Forest Zone = Vote was to increase and the recommendation from all three DNR staff in attendance (wildlife liaison, warden and forester) was also to increase.
Central Farmland Zone = Vote was to maintain. The DNR wildlife liaison and forester recommended to maintain and warden recommended to increase.
There was about 25-30 people at the meeting and everyone that hunted the Central Forest Zone voted to increase and there was a pretty much 50-50 split between maintain and increase on the Central Farmland Zone.
bueller
Moderator
It sounds like we are on the right track. Hopefully within the next couple years we will start to see the results in the Forest Zone. There were only 50 public land tags issued this year for antlerless deer and there is a ton of public land in the zone.
gvm, what are your feelings on the recommendation for the Farmland Zone?
gwm
5 year old buck +
I was fine with maintain and my vote was to maintain. I can only speak for the immediate areas I hunt but we see quite a few deer. Where my land is, there is around 700 acres total, mine and neighbors, that do a pretty good job of letting deer get older.
A CC member was pretty adamant about voting to increase in the farmland. He said they didn't see a deer except one small buck and when they started their "drives" they didn't see the deer they used to. I work with a guy who hunts right across the road from that member and he saw 22 deer opening day.
The wildlife liasion did say that out of all the counties in the farmland zone only two, Trempealeau was one, voted to increase. Apparently that raised some eyebrows in Madison.
A CC member was pretty adamant about voting to increase in the farmland. He said they didn't see a deer except one small buck and when they started their "drives" they didn't see the deer they used to. I work with a guy who hunts right across the road from that member and he saw 22 deer opening day.
The wildlife liasion did say that out of all the counties in the farmland zone only two, Trempealeau was one, voted to increase. Apparently that raised some eyebrows in Madison.
bueller
Moderator
I also think maintain was the right vote for the farmland zone. We are in the same county but have drastically different habitat, amounts of public land, and DPSM. This is exactly why I'm excited and believe in this new system, at least as far as Juneau County is concerned. The DNR recognized the difference and split the county into part forest and part farmland. They also broke antlerless tags down to public or private. This should allow in my area for example, limited public land tags to let the herd rebound yet a considerable amount of antlerless tags to try and keep the herd from growing too much on the private lands. Call me crazy if you wish but I think this new system is a drastic improvement over what we had before. Again speaking specifically about Juneau County. As November states this whole thing may mean squat in Waupaca County.
B
bat man
Guest
Does the WI DNR do any hunter satisfaction surveys as part of this process? Could anyone send a few links if they are readily available to hunter survey results?
gwm
5 year old buck +
This was the exact reasoning by many, public or DNR, for the way they voted.
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
I agree bueller. I have said since the new rule making process started that I felt if handled properly these changes would be good for Juneau Co. I don't know if they fully work in other areas(although I don't see how they wouldn't), but I know they could work in Juneau if they aren't badly manipulated by the DNR. I am excited to see what year 3 will bring. More important than that, my daughter is excited about it as well. Apparently she is sick of listening to grandpa(my dad), uncle, and dear ole' dad talk about how great the hunting was "back in the day", and she wants to be able to tell those "back in the day" stories to her own grandchildren one day. I hope her wish comes true for all our sakes. BTW, this is coming from someone who has spent their whole life growing up and hunting in this county.
Last edited:
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
We have had multiple surveys throughout the rule changing process, I wouldn't specifically call them "hunter satisfaction" surveys, but every one of them asked about number of deer seen in the field and if those numbers were acceptable to the respondent if that's the info you are looking for. I will post a few links that may be of interest.
Here is one to a page which explains the how and why of the surveys and some of the data we gather, you might want to show this to your DNR.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/documents/DTR/metrics.pdf
Here are the 2013 results of the Gun Deer Survey. It sucks that only about 40% of the 10,000 guys these get mailed to respond to the surveys.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/documents/reports/gundeer.pdf
Not a survey, but good information on the economics of deer hunting. Again, show this to your DNR.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/documents/2014deermp5.pdf
Most recent survey results from the public input on the CDAC recommendations for the county population objectives.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/documents/cdacsurveyresults.pdf
And one more for now. This is the 2013 Deer Trustee Implementation Survey results...AKA...what do you want to see after the audit. This one kind of goes with the first one.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/documents/DTR/Surveyresults.pdf
I hope some of these are helpful to you Brooks, there are tons more, but they get redundant and some you have dig a little on the website for. If you would like more, let me know and will try to dig some more up.
Last edited:
bueller
Moderator
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
"The main concern of mine is for those with CDAC's that have some goofs aboard voting with an agenda. Or if the NRB just pushes aside the CDAC recommendations and does whatever they want."
In both instances they will be outed very quickly. CDAC's that propose unrealistic goals will likely be ignored or called out by the public, to what end we will have to wait and see. After reading some of the comments by the NRB members, I think they truly want this to work as planned with the public input and all, as long as the CDAC's recommendations aren't ridiculous and going to harm the habitat or do other harm in some way(I'm thinking excessive vehicle collisions and crop damage here). There are many areas that voted to maintain and should maybe have had a slight decrease instead, but we will see how that plays out in May. Now if the NRB does do something drastic, I think it quite likely may be coming from over their heads, they are after all, appointees of the state(AKA Walker's lackeys). If they do they will be called out by the CC delegates. One of my work partners is on the La Crosse Co CC and I have him in my back pocket on this. Not saying anything gets done about it if they screw us, but they will be called out publicly.
I hope that day comes too. I look forward to stalking through some of the large blocks of public land while having a reasonable chance of at least seeing a deer again.
I actually saw a deer this season on public land that was moving through on it's own accord and not running for it's life from being pushed by drivers. Kind of nice since that hasn't happened in 2 years.
In both instances they will be outed very quickly. CDAC's that propose unrealistic goals will likely be ignored or called out by the public, to what end we will have to wait and see. After reading some of the comments by the NRB members, I think they truly want this to work as planned with the public input and all, as long as the CDAC's recommendations aren't ridiculous and going to harm the habitat or do other harm in some way(I'm thinking excessive vehicle collisions and crop damage here). There are many areas that voted to maintain and should maybe have had a slight decrease instead, but we will see how that plays out in May. Now if the NRB does do something drastic, I think it quite likely may be coming from over their heads, they are after all, appointees of the state(AKA Walker's lackeys). If they do they will be called out by the CC delegates. One of my work partners is on the La Crosse Co CC and I have him in my back pocket on this. Not saying anything gets done about it if they screw us, but they will be called out publicly.
I hope that day comes too. I look forward to stalking through some of the large blocks of public land while having a reasonable chance of at least seeing a deer again.
I actually saw a deer this season on public land that was moving through on it's own accord and not running for it's life from being pushed by drivers. Kind of nice since that hasn't happened in 2 years.
