Tree, I totally understand all the points you are bringing up and as I have said before, what you are suggesting very well could improve our overall quality of deer hunting in WI. But at what cost to the end consumer(deer hunters and folks who's businesses depend on deer hunters)? To decrease the number of hunters would only serve to raise license fees and supplant research, I for one do not want either of those. I also understand where dipper is coming from with his statement about the DNR being a huge monster with an almost insatiable appetite for funding and I don't think he's "being a dick" as he so eloquently stated, his comments contain much fact. But to that end, even real life huge monsters like lions and cape buffalo are hard to "kill" or even slow down, they don't just go away peacefully. Our DNR isn't going anywhere, it is not likely to slow down, and whether or not a person agrees with the money they spend on wildlife "research" projects is irrelevant, those projects are going to continue and the "monster" will continue to be fed by funding from deer hunters be it 100,000 or 600,000. dipper, I don't care about feeding the DNR more money, it will come from somewhere, but I would prefer to keep the cost of a license down to a reasonable amount by maintaining hunter numbers, which possibly means adding more deer. Also, as far as the research goes, I would rather have a DNR at the forefront of deer management research and policies than one that is dragging it's feet like MN, go ahead and ask those guys which they prefer at this point. I guess if all the other DNR's "leach" off our research, then so be it as long as we have a healthy and thriving deer population in WI and the majority of hunters are happy with their quality of hunting. The biggest thing I see is the fact that all too many hunters are still "living" in the 90's and early 2000's when the herd was high and hunting was "easy", this is the mindset that needs to be changed through more realistic expectations, not by decreasing the total numbers of hunters. If everyone's expectations were even 1 notch lower than they are today, they would complain much less. No one "needs" to see 10 deer per sit, that is unrealistic, but it would be nice to have enough deer that a person has a reasonable expectation of seeing a deer each sit or every other sit.
On your last comment Tree, you say that the 600,000 have "very little influence", I'm not sure how you come up with that statement? Was it the pressure of a few tens or even a few hundred guys who got the last audit proceedings started, no it was pressure on politicians from many thousands of guys that got those changes moving forward. Don't kid yourself, unless you are the Koch Bros., the strength in numbers is the only thing that is keeping the DNR from doing things exactly as they see fit and damning the hunters to follow their every whim. Again, ask the guys from MN how the low numbers of guys they have on board with the changes they seek is helping their cause, Brooks and many others are on here and other websites every day trying to get the "masses" to buy into their cause. They know that the couple hundred guys on this site aren't going to get it done and if they do not get more voices in the ears of the politico's they have literally no chance of anything changing. If that was going to happen, it would already be done. Ask yourself, is that what I really want in WI? Because that is exactly what you will get without the "backing"(i.e. strength in numbers) of the 600,000. I don't think this is how you are trying to come across, but you appear to have a skewed view of the way the political style of wildlife management(just in case you hadn't noticed, it's not going away either) is handled. Do you actually think the DNR or State Legislature gives a crap about the opinions of a few thousand of WI's "best" deer hunters, hell no they don't. They care about the opinions of 600,000 potential voters and they have asked for more deer on the landscape, and that is how and why the "Dr. Deer Audit" proceedings were initiated, not through requests from a few hunters who thought we could make WI's deer herd/hunting quality better through less funding and regulation and a smaller group of hunters. As far as "rethinking the strategy" I am open to hearing whatever suggestions anyone has, as long as I cannot shoot them full of holes right out of the gate as I have done with so many already. I have thought long and hard about it the last few years during many days sitting in the stand while not seeing a deer(I surely haven't had to think or worry about seeing anything to shoot at) and many nights laying awake wondering why is it like it is and what can I do to change it or is it worth even hunting anymore? Every guy doesn't have to be as gung-ho as you or I, they just have to have enough "go" to make their voices heard and they have spoken, which is why we got the DTR audit and the changes we have now and coming in the future. Sure we still have to wait a bit to see how it will all play out, but if something wasn't at least started by now, I feel we would have lost many more hunters already and the results would have been increased license fees to make up for lost funding, and we would still have minimal amounts of deer in many places. We may never agree on the "how", but I really do think that we all want the same end result, which is more and healthier deer where we have too few and a thinner healthier herd where there are too many. Maybe it's time to get as many "on the fence" guys as possible on board to the same level we are by talking to them and asking them to get more involved to get the changes they(we) want and put even more pressure on the DNR to do things "our" way?
