Wisconsin legislators author bill to reduce doe harvest in Northern Zone

[SwampCat]

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.

Per the attached link, fawn recruitment is extremely low in the Chattahoochee NF - .157. Predation caused 45 of 55 mortalities out of 71 fawns total. (Coyotes, bears, and bobcats) Another study - on Redstone Arsenal I believe - indicated at least in that area, fawn recruitment under .2 put the population into what they termed a “predator pit” - where fawn recruitment was not high enough to maintain or improve herd numbers. Some other measure was required to improve fawn recruitment in addition to doe protection - be it habitat improvement, predator removal, etc.

As you indicated, In the attached link, a homogenous mature forest was thought to have contributed to the decline.

While the Chattahoochee may not have wolves, there are plenty of coyotes, bears, and bobcats.

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawn survival and the influence of landscape characteristics on fawn predation risk in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, USA

In the Southern Appalachian region of the United States, harvest data has indicated the occurrence of low deer densities while exposing a trend of declining white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations over the past several decades in northern Georgia. A triumvirate of increasing fawn...

journals.plos.org

 

[SwampCat]

Good point about open season there

Much of canada also still has an active trapping population that often targets wolves

 

[omicron1792]

my hunters see one coyote every other year while we are deer hunting. I see maybe two or three during the year while riding around, planting, fishing, etc. But some nights, I hear three different packs off my front porch. We have a lot of coyotes. We see one bobcat every other year. Last year, I got pictures of four different cats in one night. We dont ever see a feral hog in day light. Yet I get pictures of them all year. I dont know that visual sightings are a true indicator.

The president of the lease I use to belong to lives for sure back in the woods. He told me - beyond a shadow of a doubt - many more bears are killed illegally than legally. He said he knew more of his neighbors who had killed a bear one year than had not - all illegal harvest. An alligator takes up residence in your private pond here and he will very soon be turned into alligator bites. All of them.

I know a lot of us southern folk are presumed to be a little less above board than other parts of the country. I dont believe many of my rural neighbors would warm up to the idea of wolves roaming their land

How many folks up there will shoot a wolf - or are they all collared and their location tracked.

Just a guess, but I would say 75% of deer harvested are not reported. Pretty much only deer reported are ones taken to a processor, which has to have a number. Most Imhof is rednecks just clean our own deer

 

[omicron1792]

Per the attached link, fawn recruitment is extremely low in the Chattahoochee NF - .157. Predation caused 45 of 55 mortalities out of 71 fawns total. (Coyotes, bears, and bobcats) Another study - on Redstone Arsenal I believe - indicated at least in that area, fawn recruitment under .2 put the population into what they termed a “predator pit” - where fawn recruitment was not high enough to maintain or improve herd numbers. Some other measure was required to improve fawn recruitment in addition to doe protection - be it habitat improvement, predator removal, etc.

As you indicated, In the attached link, a homogenous mature forest was thought to have contributed to the decline.

While the Chattahoochee may not have wolves, there are plenty of coyotes, bears, and bobcats.

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawn survival and the influence of landscape characteristics on fawn predation risk in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, USA

In the Southern Appalachian region of the United States, harvest data has indicated the occurrence of low deer densities while exposing a trend of declining white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations over the past several decades in northern Georgia. A triumvirate of increasing fawn...

journals.plos.org

Funny enough I’ve hunted next to redstone arsenal the last two days. You could hear and feel the weapons being tested.

 

[SwampCat]

Just a guess, but I would say 75% of deer harvested are not reported. Pretty much only deer reported are ones taken to a processor, which has to have a number. Most Imhof is rednecks just clean our own deer

I know they do surveys to determine the amount of compliance with online harvest and I sometimes wonder why anyone would self report a deer anymore. This is anecdotal evidence - so take it for what it is worth. When our state did away with physical check stations and went to strictly phone and online reporting was 2009. Below is a line graph of reported deer harvest in AR with required physical check station reporting and tags prior to 2009 and telephone and online reporting from 2009 and later. It is difficult to discern where self reporting from 2009 and onward resulted in a paper loss of deer harvest







My grand daughters do most of the deer killing now, and of course - have to check those deer so they can brag about them to all their friends on facebook. Many adults like to post their photos on social media, too - and more than a few have been tracked down because they didnt check them. And yes, large numbers of folks get their deer processed and must have a check number. And surprisingly, there are a few of us just purely honest deer hunting folks.

I do know prior to telephone or online reporting - when we had to go to a physical check station, we oftentimes had to drive 30 miles out of the way. It was especially frustrating when we country rednecks killed a deer in our back yard and then had to drive 25 miles one way to check it. Probably a lot went unchecked because of that.

Maybe our own G&F fictitiously made up the difference. Maybe the ease of checking a deer from your living room instead of driving 50 miles round trip brought a few of us rural rednecks to honesty. Maybe there is still a sizable number of honest folks. I have no idea.

Maybe in the south deer seasons and bag limits are liberal enough people feel they can kill enough legally and report all of them. While I am honest as the day is long when it comes to deer hunting, I am not so sure I would be so honest if a bear was tearing my bee hives apart, a gator had taken up residence in the pond where my grand kids and dogs swim, a rattlesnake was laying on the front porch (illegal to kill in my state) - or a wolf was after my dog.

 

[b116757]

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.

This is my brothers experience living in Bayfield county 1 mile from Chaquamagon National Forest. They see a lot of wolves but they are lousy to eat.

 

[chucker66]

Looks like the Assembly is trying to work it form both angles. The hard cap for wolves was at 350 and they are now proposing 1000. Current estimates are 1200 in Wis for wolves. Still don't trust them

Wisconsin Wolf Proposal.

 

[b116757]

So let me get this straight the agency that is bought and paid for by the insurance lobby will set a hard limits for wolf numbers much much higher than originally agreed to and they are the same agency that will count the wolves! omg this is hilarious

 

[Dogshooter]

So let me get this straight the agency that is bought and paid for by the insurance lobby will set a hard limits for wolf numbers much much higher than originally agreed to and they are the same agency that will count the wolves! omg this is hilarious

Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

Can’t make this stuff up.

 

[cbw]

Realistically what are the chance of getting caught. It seems low single digits. I get it, I wouldn’t want to worry but geez it seems like if enough people got on board they would be forced to evaluate their policies.
Almost seems like people would be wise to invest in a wire mesh 4’ fence around their place. Probably not perfect but I would imagine it would stop the easy flow.

My wife’s cousin had wolves attaching his cattle. He shot a wolf in NM. He ended up losing his entire ranch just defending his cattle herd. Just not right. https://www.google.com/search?q=craig+thiessen+wolf&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

I've been pretty impressed with the quality of the public land in Rusk County. There's plenty of logging going on, so there's always plenty of woods at different ages. There's also no shortage of wetlands that should give the deer places to survive the gun season. The habitat is really good, there are a pile of predators that take out the fawns, so the deer numbers are lower than they should be. The wolf numbers increase as you head north, so the northern tier of counties have horrible deer numbers.

I'd be very happy if they eliminated doe tags for a few years, but for long term improvements the predators need to be reduced.

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

My wife’s cousin had wolves attaching his cattle. He shot a wolf in NM. He ended up losing his entire ranch just defending his cattle herd. Just not right. https://www.google.com/search?q=craig+thiessen+wolf&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It looks like he was only fined $2300. How did he lose his ranch?

 

[chucker66]

I've been pretty impressed with the quality of the public land in Rusk County. There's plenty of logging going on, so there's always plenty of woods at different ages. There's also no shortage of wetlands that should give the deer places to survive the gun season. The habitat is really good, there are a pile of predators that take out the fawns, so the deer numbers are lower than they should be. The wolf numbers increase as you head north, so the northern tier of counties have horrible deer numbers.

I'd be very happy if they eliminated doe tags for a few years, but for long term improvements the predators need to be reduced.

I would say the same for Washburn. I'm not sure what would happen if they eliminated doe tags for four years. It would certainly have an impact on the economy in Washburn. I think it might result in a higher population of bears and wolves. We already get pics of sows with 5 cubs almost every year.

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

I would say the same for Washburn. I'm not sure what would happen if they eliminated doe tags for four years. It would certainly have an impact on the economy in Washburn. I think it might result in a higher population of bears and wolves. We already get pics of sows with 5 cubs almost every year.

I agree that if they just eliminated doe tags without killing more predators we would probably just end up with higher predator numbers.

 

[bwoods11]

Was there bias because the wolf was Mexican ?

 

[Buckly]

It looks like he was only fined $2300. How did he lose his ranch?

Looks like he was banned from grazing privileges on any Fed land

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

Looks like he was banned from grazing privileges on any Fed land

I thought he meant that somehow killing one wolf caused him to lose land that he owned, which didn't make sense to me. You'll get fined, but they don't come and take your property. I have no doubt that leases have stipulations and if those rules are broken you can lose the lease.

But for the record, I think the wolf situation is ridiculous and they should be treated like coyotes.

 

[Brian662]

The way you can tell there are too many wolves in WI is because the last time they had a season it lasted only hours before it got shut down on quota.

Wolf kill reaches 69% of the statewide quota in less than two days, prompting the DNR to close the season Wednesday

Hunters and trappers registered 82 wolves, 69% of the statewide harvest quota, in the first 39 hours of the hunting season.

www.jsonline.com

 

[cbw]

Looks like he was banned from grazing privileges on any Fed land

Correct.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bill]

So let me get this straight the agency that is bought and paid for by the insurance lobby will set a hard limits for wolf numbers much much higher than originally agreed to and they are the same agency that will count the wolves! omg this is hilarious

Sounds like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (NOAA) They are there to protect the ocean and its creatures. Tasked with promoting offshore wind farms by the
Brandon administration. They want us to drive our boats 10Knots/hour for the first 100 miles off shore so we don't hit a wale that knew we were coming for 20 miles. Yet they swear the dead wales and porpoises washing up over the last year have nothing to do with the high frequency sonar being used to map the ocean floor and below for said windmills. Even though just a few years ago they blamed the Navy's high frequency sonar for breaking the wales ear drums that they need to navigate and ......wait for it.........killing the wales!

Can't make that stuff up.