Wisconsin legislators author bill to reduce doe harvest in Northern Zone

[Peeps]

Can you shoot them in defense of your livestock or pets?

“I was out walking with the dog and wolves got after him so I shot them”

Is that legal?

Nope, you will be charged as wolves are listed as federally endangered. Nothing will change until the wolf and bear populations are brought under control. But the DNR has no interest in reducing either. Their new wolf plan doesn’t include a population cap and it takes over 10 years to get enough preference points to get a bear tag in many places where the bear numbers are crazy high. The DNR wants the low deer numbers.

 

[ruskbucks]

So to improve the doe herd the DNR will focus on over hunting buck herd?

Give this program 2-3 years and hunters will be screaming about over hunting of bucks.

This will really throw the buck to doe ratio off.

 

[ruskbucks]

I have land in Rusk county also. It is like Washburn. The northern part is mostly public with a low population. The southern half is private/ farmland with moderate deer numbers. Last year they had over 10,000 doe tags for sale. Basically unlimited doe tags for anyone that wants to hunt here. So stupid. The population definitely isn't out of control. Luckily the doe and buck was combined was 3300. I think if the doe harvest was doubled at 3000 it would be devastating. Why have 10,000 tags available? Now get this, all of Rusk county is proposed to the no doe for 4 years! Can we get anyone with common sense to manage the deer heard?

 

[Brian662]

No, no we can't.

 

[b116757]

Nope, you will be charged as wolves are listed as federally endangered. Nothing will change until the wolf and bear populations are brought under control. But the DNR has no interest in reducing either. Their new wolf plan doesn’t include a population cap and it takes over 10 years to get enough preference points to get a bear tag in many places where the bear numbers are crazy high. The DNR wants the low deer numbers.

Well the insurance companies want low deer numbers and with a few well placed bribes so do the DNR isn’t that interesting.

 

[Dogshooter]

Like Rusk said, this no doe season would completely flip flop the current management style of the DNR. Our Wi DNR is not the same DNR of years past…it’s turned into a very political organization that quite frankly either doesn’t care or doesn’t have the know how to manage wildlife. Most of the higher up positions are appointed by the governor and you can imagine how well that goes. Those positions are being wined and dined by the interest groups and the decisions get made accordingly.

The wolf problem is out of control in areas. It would be even more out of control if there weren’t as many folks taking matters into their own hands with them. I’m not advocating illegal activity but sure am glad some are willing to do it. Bears are a whole separate discussion but they do prey an awful lot on the fawns for the first little bit of their lives.

If this no doe deal goes through it’s a step in the right direction, but until we can get some meaningful predator control, I’m afraid it will do little good in some areas. Some of these areas are literally devoid of deer.

Look at Iron county for example. By land area Iron is number 38 of 72 Counties in the state. 782 square miles. Not a small area. Iron county has a very large amount of public land and is almost entirely big woods type ground. There were 300 deer total killed in Iron County in 2023. That is one deer killed per 1600 acres! The predators have decimated the deer herd here. There are other pockets within the state that are similar.

The best step we could take is get the politics out of the DNR. Give it back to the professionals that know how to manage wildlife, forests, waters, etc. It’s a real mess.

 

[Ikeman]

There hasn’t been a doe killed in the Northern Forest area I hunt for over 10 years except for the youth hunter tags.

In 2 weeks during mid fall on 5 cameras spread over nearly 300 acres, I got more photos of wolves, bears, and coyotes, than deer. Fact.

More does = more wolf food right now up here. Why bother?

I’m a No.

You want to fix the Northern Forest? Chainsaws and 450 wolves max statewide….like they promised us decades ago!!

Sounds like it’s time for yall to get lions back. It might sound counterintuitive, but lions HATE wolves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maddog66]

We have lions. There is a handful of Toms that migrated here from the Dakotas.

I hear there is no breeding happening yet but I’m sure one day soon our DNR will find a way to use lion management in the least hunter-friendly way possible.

As far as bears, yes I believe they do hammer fawns for a week our 2 each year, but if I had to choose between bears on my land and wolves, give me the bears.

Wolves hunt my land literally 365 days a year…..and now that they are getting good at killing elk….prepare to see those disappear too.

But to stay on track, I still submit that a “no doe” season in my area is like a hot lunch program for predators.

 

[Jerry-B-WI]

Different thought here. I know that the deer population/harvest numbers have been a hot button up north for a long time. Is it possible that the deep woods/public land just can't support a deer population? Or a population that hunters/landowners would like to see.

Why would the deer stay in a mature forest where there is little to eat except some browse when they can go to an ag area and feast all year round?

Just reading the posts here it sounds like the ag areas don't have a problem but the deep forest, mature forest areas have problems.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Different thought here. I know that the deer population/harvest numbers have been a hot button up north for a long time. Is it possible that the deep woods/public land just can't support a deer population? Or a population that hunters/landowners would like to see.

Why would the deer stay in a mature forest where there is little to eat except some browse when they can go to an ag area and feast all year round?

Just reading the posts here it sounds like the ag areas don't have a problem but the deep forest, mature forest areas have problems.

I’ve mentioned this before, I have run hundreds of miles and hours in the woods of north Georgia. All public land. Anywhere from 4 hours to 25 hours at a time. I have seen exactly 0 deer in all that time and distance. They don’t have wolves, but they do have an abundance of mismanaged, closed canopy forests. I’m sure wolves are super bad for deer but Canada has wolves and deer. I think the forest management practices are just as much to blame.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

Sounds like it’s time for yall to get lions back. It might sound counterintuitive, but lions HATE wolves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not if lions are better than wolves, but lions freak me out! I was out coon hunting with dogs one night and had one scream at me, my pup I was training freaked out and took off, and I had my son with me that was about 8, and I only had a bolt action .22 with me at the time. I would much rather encounter a wolf while walking through the woods rather than a cougar.

 

[Dogshooter]

Different thought here. I know that the deer population/harvest numbers have been a hot button up north for a long time. Is it possible that the deep woods/public land just can't support a deer population? Or a population that hunters/landowners would like to see.

Why would the deer stay in a mature forest where there is little to eat except some browse when they can go to an ag area and feast all year round?

Just reading the posts here it sounds like the ag areas don't have a problem but the deep forest, mature forest areas have problems.

The north does have pockets of usfs land that has been basically off limits to logging. However, there is a lot of County Forest and State land that has been managed great. Lots of young forest and plenty of browse. Back to my Iron County example, Iron has 175,000 acres of County land, of the 500,000 there. I didn’t dig too deep on state acres but there are some.

I’m a forester. I get around lot of these areas. While there are some areas that the habitat doesn’t support the browse required, that is by far the exception to the rule.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

Different thought here. I know that the deer population/harvest numbers have been a hot button up north for a long time. Is it possible that the deep woods/public land just can't support a deer population? Or a population that hunters/landowners would like to see.

Why would the deer stay in a mature forest where there is little to eat except some browse when they can go to an ag area and feast all year round?

Just reading the posts here it sounds like the ag areas don't have a problem but the deep forest, mature forest areas have problems.

When I first started coming up to Northern Wisconsin hunting in the 90’s, and when I bought my land in the early 2000’s, the deer numbers were high. Back then hardly any wolves, late 2000 until present, and 1 rough winter with the wolves and bears, and I am lucky to see a deer all week from my house, which before, several times a day year around would be normal.

 

[rocksnstumps]

The north does have pockets of usfs land that has been basically off limits to logging. However, there is a lot of County Forest and State land that has been managed great. Lots of young forest and plenty of browse. Back to my Iron County example, Iron has 175,000 acres of County land, of the 500,000 there. I didn’t dig too deep on state acres but there are some.

I’m a forester. I get around lot of these areas. While there are some areas that the habitat doesn’t support the browse required, that is by far the exception to the rule.

County Forest is usually well managed with local focus and where things like grouse hunting is 10x better than National Forest even tho a further drive for me. Only thing you gotta be flexible as they cut areas a lot more and places with good hunting 5-10 yrs ago are now clearcut!

Edit: my comments are specific to better grouse hunting not so much deer. That is directly related to more logging activity on county land vs the national forest which is not cut as much and has less of the things we like to hunt in general.

 

[Maddog66]

Couple of BIG misconceptions above imo.

I and my best friends / family have deer hunted in NW Ontario and NW Wisconsin for decades.

Today in NWO, in spite of massive logging, the wolves have decimated the population.

In NW Wisconsin during the same time, we’ve seen logging on public land drop to effectively zero (ie deer food) AND wolves went from a remnant population to 1500+ concentrated on 1/3 of the state.

MY LAND : is not public and it’s managed for deer and other wildlife better than 100% of my neighbors within 2 miles minimum.

The better I make it, the more does and fawns I attract, the more wolves I attract….and the cycle repeats.

25 years ago we were told by the Govt that “wolves only take the sick and weak” and “we would have a genetically diverse, self sustaining herd” with 100-450 wolves statewide. And we bought it. Now look where we are.

 

[jackpine]

When I first started coming up to Northern Wisconsin hunting in the 90’s, and when I bought my land in the early 2000’s, the deer numbers were high. Back then hardly any wolves, late 2000 until present, and 1 rough winter with the wolves and bears, and I am lucky to see a deer all week from my house, which before, several times a day year around would be normal.

Same where I am in southern Douglas County. Wolf tracks started appearing about 15 years ago. Now, if you drive the logging roads after a snow there are way more wolf tracks than deer tracks.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Tree Spud]

I’ve mentioned this before, I have run hundreds of miles and hours in the woods of north Georgia. All public land. Anywhere from 4 hours to 25 hours at a time. I have seen exactly 0 deer in all that time and distance. They don’t have wolves, but they do have an abundance of mismanaged, closed canopy forests. I’m sure wolves are super bad for deer but Canada has wolves and deer. I think the forest management practices are just as much to blame.

Canada has an open season on wolves. I get a wolf tag every time I hunt whitetail up there. Guide has about 6-8 tags. Hunters can buy tags over the counted and when you add coyotes & bears (black & brown) to the mix, pretty heavy hunting pressure on wolves up there.

An adult wolf will kill one deer every week to survive. That doesn't take into consideration # of fawns killed in the spring.

We have wolves in our area. A couple of years ago a lone male wolf frequented my property over the winter. Found 10 dead deer that winter with one within a hundred yards of our house.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Canada has an open season on wolves. I get a wolf tag every time I hunt whitetail up there. Guide has about 6-8 tags. Hunters can buy tags over the counted and when you add coyotes & bears (black & brown) to the mix, pretty heavy hunting pressure on wolves up there.

An adult wolf will kill one deer every week to survive. That doesn't take into consideration # of fawns killed in the spring.

We have wolves in our area. A couple of years ago a lone male wolf frequented my property over the winter. Found 10 dead deer that winter with one within a hundred yards of our house.

Good point about open season there

 

[Brian662]

Canada has an open season on wolves. I get a wolf tag every time I hunt whitetail up there. Guide has about 6-8 tags. Hunters can buy tags over the counted and when you add coyotes & bears (black & brown) to the mix, pretty heavy hunting pressure on wolves up there.

An adult wolf will kill one deer every week to survive. That doesn't take into consideration # of fawns killed in the spring.

We have wolves in our area. A couple of years ago a lone male wolf frequented my property over the winter. Found 10 dead deer that winter with one within a hundred yards of our house.

What province is that?

I used to do quite a bit of waterfowl hunting in SK and non-residents weren't even allowed to shoot coyotes. That in itself is crazy, but then you factor in that the government had a bounty on them for the residents made it even crazier.

 

[Maddog66]

I’ll try to pull this back to the OP’s honest attempt to discuss a policy.

As we’ve seen, everyone’s experience even within the Northland is different and I’m not saying wolves are the only problem. Other predators, strings of hard winters, and mature forests have all been mentioned.

This proposed legislation is probably the perfect thing to do in some areas. I honestly believe that. But in areas like mine, older age class bucks are nearly nonexistent now. More buck exploitation makes that worse imo.

Our doe population is already hanging on by a thread with essentially zero legal harvest in the last 10 years+.

So, I just don’t see how not doing something we aren’t doing anyway (killing does) increases fawn survival and carry over….resulting in an overall increased population.

We all know where any “surplus” goes in my neck of the woods. YMMV.

Edit: if “open season” in Ontario means an expensive non-resident tag plus screwing around with a CITES tag to get it across the border, then yup, it’s open season.

Residents up there can whack them at will and some do, but they don’t even dent the population unless trapping is employed. Again IMO