wingchaser_labs

The problem is the DNR seems to still think we have too many deer in WI thus the continue of these herd control tactics. All due to these outdated pop models they continue to use. We know there isn't enough deer in many areas and that there are too many deer in a few selected areas however biologists are blind to that because they see all lands as a whole and their outdated models tell them there is stilltoo many deer....

Biggest problem is there isn't enough deer on public land which holds the majority of hunters in WI and the majority of the revenue in license sales....

My proposed planthat I have belived in and talked with people about for awhile now is....
1) Break the units of the state up into larger regions based on the current pop estimates and herd control tactics.
2) With larger units and a restructure of what is considered deer habitat (was discussed by biologists at a previous meeting as the current habitat during winteris classified as 10 acres of woody structure with 20 deer per square mile of deer habitat). We all know deer hang out in alot less cover than that.
3) Within those regions segregate regulationsbetween private and public lands.
- Public = hunters choice tag and possibly until pops go up in certain regions on public land bucks only.
- Private = herd control tactics that are currently structured by the DNR in those regions.
3) Results over a few years...
-Pops in the areas that need thinning will be achieved and public hunters will get increased harvest oppurtunity.
- More land will be put into deer habitat classification and will dispurse the deer per square mile counts to more realistic levels and show that deer populations are not too high.

WCL

outdoorsman4life_103

so you sugest the public land can only have bucks hunted? What is keeping people from saying they are hunting on public when they are realy hunting private? my land borders public on two sides. So if I had the choice of unregulated hunting or regulated hunting, why would i choose to hunt in a way that stops me from harvesting different types of animals?

wingchaser_labs

Whats keeping people from doing that now with EAB and non EAB zones??Nothing, as many people do it and claim they shot this buck on non EAB zones or they claim they shot this doe on EAB to get a stickerwhen they shot it on non EAB. As a whole most people are not violators. Nothing can be perfect but I don't think it would be any more of a problem than it is today with violations of the same type. There are wardens out there as well asselfish neighbors andhunters who Ithink would turn alot of hunters in if they claimed to have shot it on public when they didn't... Either way it would result in more deer on public land and for the majority I don't think most of the people would be violating as they know the consequences. Heck maybe they would just have to make the fines bigger and make it know in the regs. That would keep more people from doing that.

I think most public land shouldbe a choice tag though. Also I forgot to mention thatanother good option would beif theydidn't separate the private and publicmanagements that public land should be excluded from all t-zone antlerless hunts outside of the 9 day gun and muzzeloader seasons.

quote:
"So if I had the choice of unregulated hunting or regulated hunting, why would i choose to hunt in a way that stops me from harvesting different types of animals?"

Not following you on this one? If I understand this correctly your sayign why would you hunt public land when you can hunt private land? Private is still regulated it just allows more harvesting. I know I would never hunt public land when I have private to hunt. Howevermost people are limited and don't have access to private lands. WCL

dandbuck

THere is a big hurdle to overcome here folks. That being: if you look at total kill numbers, then 2008 is like the 4-5th highest EVER kill. If there are really that many less deer, why is the kill so high? i'm not saying it's right, wrong or whatever, but with these type of numbers, it only lets the DNR say that what they are doing is working, so why change it? I would like to see the wolf numbers change also, but that's another, though related, story. Good luck, staying informed and going to meetings can only help your case. Do a search on these forums, especially theregional forums, there was some great information this past winter on one thread that i can not remember.
Dandbuck

Ok, found it: http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=3361881&mpage=1&key=&#336315 1

semi

i saw more wolf tracks this year than any year before. But they don't exist in wisc according to the DNR. They are protected.

outdoorsman4life_103

The DNR doesnt say we dont have wolves..

wingchaser_labs

The kills have stayed on par because they have given out more tags every year making more units EABforcing people to shoot does with EAB. In that sense it doesn't tell much about the population. If the tag allocation to harvest ratio was calculated I bet there would be a huge decline in the percent of allocated tags that were filled.

Kill historyfrom DNR Website (wanted to get a pre season pop estimation of each year to but couldn't find it)
2001- 445,000
2002- 336,000
2003- 426,257
2004- 517,169
2005- 465,760
2006- 506,947
2007- 518,573--------Pop est. 1.8 million deer
2008- 451,900--------Pop est. 1.6 million deer however adjusted to 1.2-1.3 million admitted mistake by the DNR half way throught he gun season and they had suspected it half way through the bow season due to harsh 07-08 winter and higher bear pop fawn kills and flooding fawn kills.

Previous to 2001 there were other kills in the 450-500000+ range according to the graphs but had no exact numbers. I do not beleive 2008 is in that top 5 but maybe close. The kicker here is you have to consider tag allocation has increased over the years and with the EAB it has forced more deer to be shot every year dispite how many are out there. Eventually it will hit a point where there is to few deer and the harvests drop drastically even with high tag allocation methods...

Also with the increased EAB units over the years the SAK pop estimations are not going to be accurate as it is based off of buck fawn kills. SAK is that big hurdle that needs to be over come...

Also consider this. The pop goal of WI wintering deer has changed by less than 100,000 since the 1960s. This makes no sense cuz we all know that there has been an increase in deer habitat with less farming, more CRP implamented, wooded areas expanding, and marsh lands drying up. This all leads to much more "deer habitat" and what is classified as"deer habitat" by biologists is what determines the number of deer we can have based of the square miles of deer habitat. The deer habitat classification is currently being discussed and looked at by biologist but who knows if it will change. The SAK system still hasn't.

quote from wi website
""
The original over winter (post hunting season) goal for the Wisconsin deer herd was 441,900 deer. As deer range expanded and hunting interest increased, the post-hunt goal has grown until today it stands at approximately 733,000, an increase in goal of more than 65%.
Between 1962 and 1984, the post-hunt estimate averaged 1% over goal. Between 1985 and 1994, the post-hunt estimate averaged 16% above goal, and between 1995 and 2008 the average was 48% over goal. The post-hunt estimate indicates that the statewide deer herd has been at or within 5% of goal only once in the last 20 years.
Wisconsin’s estimated post-hunt deer population is above goal again this year. However, at the end of the 2008 deer season, statewide harvest data suggests significant progress toward goal. Most units within farmland regions are still above goal, while many units in the north are currently near or below goal following the effects of a moderate to severe winter in 2007-2008.""

wingchaser_labs

There is estimated 1,100-1,200 wolves in WI according to our professor here at UW-SP. I don't think that includes the pup crop this spring so maybe a 100-150 increase from that.

dandbuck

Wingchaser
I'm not saying it's good or bad, just saying they use the kill numbers to support their agenda. I too think too many tags are given out. If i could take a buck and a doe with rifle and bow, that would be plenty, most likely too many. I have yet to fill each tag i get. BTW, Point school is only 20 minutes from my place, maybe we shold get together sometime.
Dandbuck

semi

Up until the 2007 and 2008 hunting season local DNR said there are very few wolves in Wisc hence the reason for protection. It turns out that they grossly underestimated the wolf population and grossly over estimated the deer population. A combination of both factors make for a low deer season. I believe they overestimated the deer population so more tags would be sold, but this will backfire as people will lose interest if they don't see any deer year over year. The dnr also says we have no mountain lions yet 1 month ago one was photo'd in Vilas county using a trail cam. The DNR is this state is one of the most worthless tax payer funded organizations. They are consistantly wrong with counts and prove to be some of the biggest wastes of air.