WI Hunting Rule Changes

[younggun1849]

I know a lot of you are from Wisconsin. What would you like to see changed from the perspective of "rules" to help improve our age structure.

I have a "long term" perspective on things, where some, maybe most (not on here but in the general public) have a short term perspective. I pass up a year and half old 8 point, hoping he makes it 3 more years and will stick around and be a buck we can put on the hitlist at 4 years old. I clear cut areas knowing they won't hold any deer this year, but in 3 years they will be dynamite. I plant pines knowing I won't benefit from them for 5 years at least, and the list goes on. A lot of people won't pass up a 2 year old because they are afraid he will run to the neighbors and get shot, that's a short term perspective. We can't change peoples perspectives overnight, and that's alright. But what if WI took a step in the direction that will help "deer managers" like most of us. I know quite a few "trophy hunters" and most rarely shoot a buck with a bow, and a gun in the same year because they are waiting on a "shooter" and it's tough to shoot 2 good bucks in a year.

I would like to see WI take a step in the direction that will help "deer managers" like most of us.

Why not go to a 1 buck a year rule like MN? Gun or bow, but you only get one, make sure it's something you want to pull the trigger on. The people it will affect most are the people who shoot the first buck that comes by every year. If we have 1 buck a year that will get more younger bucks through the hunting season and have another year to grow.

Why not go shotgun only? No picking deer off at 200 yards anymore. Going to shotgun would probably save 25% of the deer harvested every year.

Antler point restrictions? Can't hurt anything, except for youth hunters under the age of 18 should not have to abide by that possibly? We need those young hunters to get hooked, and then grow as hunters.

Party Hunting?

Wisconsin consistently has world class whitetails, and we have some of the poorest, or should I say non existent, management rules in the country. It's a free for all out there! Just think the potential we have, and what could be achieved with maybe just a few minor rule changes.

This is just brainstorming and I'd like to see what ideas everyone else has.

I hope everyone had a fun and safe gun season!

 

[dipper]

I know kid, it's so frustrating. In central wi they stand a decent chance of making it to 2.5. I did a drive through of 3 registration stations opening day, and 80% were yearlings. I did not see a buck over 120". So there are a ton of bucks dying young.
I have never seen so many bow hunters, and we all know how many gun hunters are out there. Wi bucks lack the ability to grow old. Besides an act of God, that's not changing.

 

[Tree Spud]

Earn-a-buck was a deer management program that worked and helped to balance the sex ratio and improved age structure. It just should have never been applied state wide. It was also changing the mindset and culture of the hunter here in Wisconsin which was a good thing. You have too many hunters in Wis who refuse to shoot a doe.

I would go with shotgun & muzzleloader.

I would not favor point restriction as I think a lot of young deer would be shot and then never recovered.

Stop treating private land owners different than farmers ... allow private land owners more tools, and subsidies, to manage the heard.

Unfortunately all of the above would work against the DNR's mindset ... they appear to believe that more hunters, more weapons, and no mgmt. of what hunters choose to shoot is the solution.

 

[dipper]

wi is a lost cause, tree is exactly right. There are so many hunters who won't shoot a doe for the life of them, but hammer the first fork they see. The years surrounding eab were the best years for trophy bucks. I can't say exactly why, but I have a pretty good idea.
There are just too many hunters shooting way to many bucks. Age, age, age a dead 2.5 will never be a whopper, and 99% of the 300,000 hunters see that as a trophy. Shotgun only areas are done, that is why Waupaca and shawano counties are sliding. Hell even buffalo is sliding. One buck limit is nothing more than a wet dream.
The masses have spoken. The dnr has 0 intention to manage for trophy deer. They could if they wanted, but the masses have spoken. The nice thing is I could sell my land and hunt like a king anywhere in the world.

 

[dipper]

Hey young-maybe you and your realator buddies can spend some of that money your making and really drive up the land prices? Your benefiting the most of anybody, time to grab Scott walkers ear, and make some real change. That's the only way things will improve.
Btw-are you actually moving land at $4700-$5000/ acre. I've got 80 acres for sale down the road for $395000, that's damn tempting......

 

[younggun1849]

Hey young-maybe you and your realator buddies can spend some of that money your making and really drive up the land prices? Your benefiting the most of anybody, time to grab Scott walkers ear, and make some real change. That's the only way things will improve.
Btw-are you actually moving land at $4700-$5000/ acre. I've got 80 acres for sale down the road for $395000, that's damn tempting......

Dip, I only have 1 property for sale in that price range. It's 50 acres in Buffalo, and the only reason we have it priced at that point is because of the access it provides to Big Swamp Wildlife Area, which is 794 acres I believe. Access to Big Swamp is tough as there is only 1 access point from the south and you have to walk through pure swamp to get to anywhere you can hunt, let alone get a deer out of there. With the way the 50 acres is laid out you have access to hundreds of acres that nobody would even think about hunting in, because access is nearly impossible. So technically you only own 50, but you will be the only person to hunt more like 250 acres, look at it that way and 1,000 bucks an acre isn't too bad of a deal, especially with the caliber of bucks they are shooting in the neighborhood. They shot a 180" giant last weekend on the neighbors place, pics of him are on the listing. He spent some time on this 50 acres, and there's pics of him in the back of a truck dead, he's a beast.

Scott Walker is a hunter, probably not a "trophy hunter" like us, but he did get Dr Deer to give some input, not sure how much the DNR listened, but who knows. Did Dr Deer give some advice that will help protect young bucks? Was his plan to just improve the deer numbers, not the age structure?

I think the future of "quality hunting" in WI is in cooperatives. Get your neighbors on the same page, and educate them. Show them what a buck does when he reaches 4 years old. People love deer hunting in WI, and the only way people are going to pass bucks is if they know for certain their neighbors will not shoot it as well. It's a competition people love it so much, so if we get eveyone on the same page, it makes things 10 times better. I started the Eleva Ridge Wildlife Management Association in Southern Eau Claire County where my farm is and it has been awesome so far! We have over 2,500 acres on board and it has really taken off. Guys are sharing pictures, talking with each other, saying what bucks we will pass, which ones are on the hitlist etc. It's so much more fun when neighbors work together, as opposed to against eachother!

 

[bwoods11]

I don't hunt Wisconsin, maybe will in future. If you want change and more mature bucks then APR would be your answer. You probably wouldn't need it in every county, but I bet the results would be great in the SW corner (SE MN has proven it works).

 

[Tree Spud]

I think the future of "quality hunting" in WI is in cooperatives. Get your neighbors on the same page, and educate them. Show them what a buck does when he reaches 4 years old. People love deer hunting in WI, and the only way people are going to pass bucks is if they know for certain their neighbors will not shoot it as well. It's a competition people love it so much, so if we get eveyone on the same page, it makes things 10 times better.

That sounds a lot like ... cheerleaders saying ... "why can't we be friends" ... or some other bumper sticker slogan ...

I have tried that approach for 20 years. I am a semi successful hunter ... I have the bone on the wall to support that. I have worked very hard with all neighbors, etc. in a very low key way to suggest to them that if they can identify age (2.5,3.5) and hold off, the will see dramatic changes in in the bucks they harvest.

Every year I show them something they have never taken, typically 20-35" larger. Three neighbors have owned the land for 2-3 generations. Every year they have the same results ... after no immediate success opening weekend ... they start driving the woods Sun - Thur.

Stopped by their places yesterday ... they all had multiple 8-12 point bucks from the drives. All of these bucks were 95-120". They took bucks that all had good age genetics and strong 3.5 year old growth potential. They were all happy because some had their best bucks ever. I was happy for them because they are friends.

What they don't realize is that they just robbed their potential, and all landowners, for a legitimate book buck the next few years, like they have done the last 50 years. They "might" hunt for a doe in the December holiday hunt. In reality, they never do ... they got their buck and their venison.

The only way things change, is when the DNR starts to manage the resource managers ... the hunters ... until then, "brown is down", "basket rack success", and "meat in the freezer" mentality rules ...

 

[shawnv]

One may disagree with APR's but the aging stats show it has been allowing more bucks to reach 3.5 unless you believe the MN DNR fabricated the numbers. Tree Spud, sounds like you are stuck because if your neighbors are happy there is nothing you can say that will allow them to pass on those deer. You either have to accept what you have to work with or look elsewhere. What I might suggest is working with other neighbors in the area because some will listen to you and maybe 5 years down the road you'll have enough guys in your group that the word and peer pressure changes your immediate neighbor. I would also start small and see if you can at least get a larger % of the yearling bucks to make it to that next year.

 

[dipper]

Your not gonna change someone who doesn't want to change. I could go on and on with stories about my neighbors, and how you just can't chsnge them. One told me this year, "I like guys like you who pass them young bucks, that's just more for me." Now you stack 7 guys on a 40 with multiple buck tags, crossbows, scoped rifles, and the will to kill. You can have 14 dead bucks by January. This is famed Waupaca county, WAS a top 5 trophy county.
There is just too damn many hunters, and they are extremely efficient at killing what they want to kill. There might be some who pass yearlings, but when the quality of bucks starts slipping, it's abandon ship, and any yearling is game.

 

[NWWI]

This may not be an immediate game changing idea but what about improving the habitat on some public lands. Public lands in Wisconsin are either biological deserts due to lack of food and cover or over hunting in the areas with good habitat. I realize the DNR needs to manage for all species, but if they could devote small chunks of lands to be used better for white tails it could help. Teach local conservation clubs or Boy Scout Troops some of the habitat things that we are all trying to do. Let the local farmer plant a small section of the property. It might help some start to think about deer hunting for more than a couple weeks a year. More deer in the neighborhood would benefit most of us.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

I gotta agree with stu, tree spud and dipper on this one:

A) Walker isn't a hunter. He's a politician that pretends to hunt for votes.
B) Cooperatives sound great in theory, but the overwhelming majority I know of crumble within a few years, with many of the members/neighbors going from friends to not liking each other.
C) WI DNR will most likely never do anything to help trophy hunting in WI. They are about as anti trophy hunting as it gets.

 

[shawnv]

Walker wanted to be a hunter until he saw no deer and then gave up the sport... ;)

 

[bat man]

This may not be an immediate game changing idea but what about improving the habitat on some public lands.

I know in MN habitat is not the issue in areas with few to zero deer. Bullets are the issue.

 

[bwoods11]

Stu--SW Corner of the state (quit a few pass the small bucks anyway)? I would think APR would be favored by quite a few hunters---50% I have no idea, I am just speculating. Wow, I would think it would amazing area if they implemented APR?
That being said, maybe it's working just fine, I personally don't know. I do know it would really rock in my area of MN. I can count several bucks near my farms that would have survived if APR would have been implemented and followed by the hunters. Our area would have many more survivors and the bucks would get some age.

The fight for APR has not been tested much in MN. I don't think any group outside of SE MN has even proposed it to the point of just talking about it?? I could be wrong?

 

[Tree Spud]

I gotta agree with stu, tree spud and dipper on this one:

A) Walker isn't a hunter. He's a politician that pretends to hunt for votes.
B) Cooperatives sound great in theory, but the overwhelming majority I know of crumble within a few years, with many of the members/neighbors going from friends to not liking each other.
C) WI DNR will most likely never do anything to help trophy hunting in WI. They are about as anti trophy hunting as it gets.

Steve ... what is sad is that managing for trophy bucks would actually raise the tide for all hunters. The DNR would see better herd mgmt by killing more does (ie - Earn-a-buck) and more bucks would reach 3.5 - 4.5.

The DNR would also see an increase in license revenue if Wis could reach it's trophy buck potential. Illinois charges out of state hunters $425 for a buck tag, Wis charges $160.

 

[shawnv]

I think from the Northern MN hunter's perspective, I would hope a good number of hunter's decide to not hunt anymore until the deer numbers return.

 

[bat man]

I agree...but the problem is that many of the guys who used to hunt northern MN are now hunting central MN. More hunters+fewer deer = crappy results

Not to hijack but the MN DNR is fudging hunter effort in regards to number of hunters per zone now as well.

I hope the hunters of WI can at least maintain what they have right now-

 

[shawnv]

I would love to see an end to party hunting as suggested and our public lands will improve once they increase logging as proposed (unless that was election talk). The state does have a difficult task trying to manage the herd for many different groups so it's not easy. The DNR brass does not like the trophy hunter in WI one bit so we'll see no help from the state in that regard.

I do see more people passing on yearlings than I have ever before but those who do will always be in the minority. It's more difficult I think to tell people then to also not shoot a doe, you just have to have self control. I just ended the third year at my home farm without shooting a single doe yet.

 

[bwoods11]

I am not saying APR is the answer in Wisconsin (especially if there is a CWD area). What I am saying is look across the river at the results in SE MN. Guys that I know in that area have said it has really changed their area. Way more mature bucks, rutting, ripped up woods. More daylight activity.

This is what happens when you have more bucks/better buck to doe ratio. Competition between bucks for the does. I see it first hand when I hunt in Iowa.