What do we want the deer seasons in WI to accomplish?

Do we want the harvest of deer to be keyed mostly to manage the herd size and numbers and provide as good of sporting opportunities that we can?

Or do we want the hunt to be heavily favored for the sport of hunting and let deer herd management fall by the wayside?

In the past say 50 years ago the seasons we had seemed to accomplish quite well both of those and over the last decades we have moved away from both and we have significant lack of trust in the science and we are finding that politics causes the sporting aspect of the hunt and harvest to be tainted as well.
We read hundreds of posts on this forum and others about how the youth are being coddled to and there are awards for participation and also we can't have failure because it will ruin the youth's self-esteem. Now let us move that to the adult arena when it comes to harvesting deer. We now have adults that feel they are entitled to shoot a buck because the buy a license and there should be enough deer to see so I can choose which one to harvest.
We wonder where this self-centered and entitlement in our youth comes from? We don't need to look far at all.

It seems most are concerned about hunting the intense rut. Why do we have all those other weeks of seasons if the rut is the major point for all the hunters? We could make the rut the season by say having the season the first Saturday of November until the end of the 3rd weekend with bow hunters going first for the first week one year, xbows first week another and gun hunters first the 3rd etc. Maybe then we would have managed antlerless seasons before and after depending upon the county desires for population controls. This done tongue in cheek but to me this whole issue shows a level of immaturity that does not bode well for hunting and hunters down the road. The one advantage of this is that it would make a huge number of hunters involved in all three methods depending upon the season.

Bryce

bblwi, to me it is about sound population management and the opportunity to kill a deer. Antlers or not, I am hunting to eat.

I agree that far too many think they have the right to shoot the big one. And that they are entitled to it. Some areas just don't have big antlers. Deer don't care about property lines.

Used to be we would be happy to see a guy shoot any kind of deer. Never worried about points, widths, G-2 lengths, etc.

The members of WBA what the rut all to themselves and that's It In a nut shell. They don't care about deer management unless It manages them to hunt the rut.

If I lay down my money to hunt deer then no special interest group should be able to tell me when I can hunt. This Isn't merry old England and the kings deer. WBA

Too much special interest group involvement in WI wildlife management. If it's not the WBA, it's the WI Bear Hunters Association.

There is something about this idea that keeps drawing me to it, but I keep coming back to the idea that it would actually make the issue worse, not better if we look at the concern they are trying to solve. It would increase buck harvest before the gun hunters get a crack at them.

That said, there is another question about a lottery for limited tag items as a way to increase revenue for the department. Like they do for elk. Legislators have not been keen on increasing fees, but they have started to show a willingness to look at lotteries. I wonder if they did a lottery for this type of tag, what the interest would be?

There is something about this idea that keeps drawing me to it, but I keep coming back to the idea that it would actually make the issue worse, not better if we look at the concern they are trying to solve. It would increase buck harvest before the gun hunters get a crack at them.

[/quote]


If they want to shoot a buck that bad, get a muzzleloader or take up bowhunting.

Not saying I don't agree with you, but now comes the million dollar question...are you going to allow the use of in-lines and scopes in this primitive hunt?

And here I though all the nuts lived in MN.

It's a deer, kill them.

Finally a nonresident has joined the discussion or should I say, enough joined that I noticed their presence. I did see there is a question about raising the license cost for nonresidents on deer and bear as well. Lots of possible changes that go outside season length.

That one falls under WCC advisory question. That is where you see the questions about badger season, extending bobcat season, and a host of other topics.
https://p.widencdn.net/d0xgfq/2020-01-4D-Congress-Matters-2020-spring-hearing-advisory-questions

if taking of deer is what is important , I am only looking for a safe way to do it in a longer season. I think we got away from the iron sights only during ml season because then you have all the people who have vision issues who have to get an exception. just like all the people who had bad shoulders bad back ect.. that would have to get a xbow exception that when your DR made you go through a Physical Therapist and your insurance would not cover it your dropping hundreds on BS state bureaucracy.
you could make muzzle loader antler-less only start it oct 1 and run it for the month so you get the heard management your wanting but not uspet the vertical bow folks so much they will likely raise a fuss no matter what.

I say muzzle loader but could as easily be single shot rifle , the point is take deer , control heard size, in the locations that need it and use the resources that pay you for the privilege of shooting deer.

I don't get all this "this tool is too good concern" . you want heard management or not? offer a way through extended season and tags to get the management you want.where you want it .

we have an over abundance of a species in specific areas in the state. We have a resource of people who would be willing to harvest them for free. we need to get the people resource in touch with the landowners and give them time to harvest the numbers that make for better herd management.

Are they allowing to vote online this year in case you cannot make the meeting?

Yes

Until they remove politics and people that know nothing about hunting from setting our rules, things won't get better.

On line voting Is going to screw us.

From what I heard when the allowed it, the online votes didn't hold much water.

So they are going to throw out the on line votes. If that happens that gives the antis more ammunition.

No to your first option, its a selfish option, whats good for hunters and screw the rest of the citizens of the state.
I think your 2nd option assumes that "sport of hunting" and herd management are not compatible.

The answer should be what we want the deer seasons to accomplish is to first keep the herd in check so that the herd is not doing damage to the environment. When the deer herd is such that various native plants are are completely eliminated or unable to complete their life cycles due to deer over browse then the herd is too big and more deer need to be thinned. I'm not even going to go into AG industry and Ins. industries, the effect of herd size greatly effects these industries and then indirectly effects every consumer in the state.
This is sound management of natural resources. Managing for larger herds at the expense of other plants, animals and other interests is a poor management model.

I'm on another forum that's mostly WI guys. Lots are hardcore and hunt a lot and put in the hours. Lots are saying this last year was really bad with low deer sightings. Lots of mobile guys that don't hunt the same 40 or 80 every weekend. These are the guys who's opinions matter to me. They know what's out there. No agenda to push like the dnr. It's been an ongoing slaughter for years. I really wish we'd go back to a format like before all the t zones. Archery season. 9 day gun season. Late archery. No more special antlerless hunts, no more youth hunts. Get back to tradition. Once that framework is back in place, figure where crossbows and muzzleloaders fit in.

My statements were questions and yes I do believe that decades ago we were closer to being better at herd management and offering a good hunting experience for most hunters. What has happened since that time is we have tried to offer many more options for specific groups and also we have developed huge "turf" wars as regards to who should have access and when to the deer herd. Yes we can offer herd management and offer good opportunities for hunters but it will not be with similar approaches and science that was used in the past. It will take a long time to sort through as to how to better manage our deer herd with all the variables we have today and the vast majority of those being human and thus political in nature. Habitats over time are changing and especially the northern 3rd of the state with the old growth forest returning to much of the public and private forest areas of the north. We could offer some really different hunting options for these northern areas where the herd is smaller, densities less etc.
Many believe that the DNR wants to slaughter all the deer and if you hunt on public ground that may well be what one sees. I would also believe that on the majority of private land that the deer herd is significantly under harvested on purpose to maintain higher densities and thus one of the major ways to keep numbers lower is to shoot as many as possible in areas where access is allowable and easier. j

For those that want to see and shoot more deer there are areas where that is easily possible. So if time and money are not issues to shooting more deer the opportunities are available if one chooses to search them out.

Bryce

For many years, the department kept number artificially high. They limited harvest to keep the quality of experience high. Deer were no different than bears, otter, etc. Then there came a time when folks started to realize there was costs associated with doing so they over corrected IMO. The pendulum continues to swing.

Folks not seeing deer should go hunt Winnebago county. There is enough public you should be able to find some deer if you are willing to work for them. Sure you might bump into folks from time to time, but a guy can get away from folks if you work at it or hunt after opening weekend. The county has great cell coverage so you can register the deer before you even start dragging. Plus, the county has yet to have a positive CWD deer.

IMO that is the great thing about CDACs. They don't have to be a one size fits all approach. Folks locally can make that decision and it doesn't have to be a dictatorship. Folks are forced to work together instead of complaining and expecting someone else to fix the problem or create a different one for someone else.