Kroll Initial Report - March

Super.

JC let me throw a quote back at you...

“I'll take crazy over stupid any day.” Joss Whedon

Glass houses my friend glass houses.

That is absolutely too logical. Many of the guys believe it will get better by itself. Insanity is defined as keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

It's pretty obvious the state as a whole has a multitude of problems. That is why I find it hard to believe how many people are getting all worked up with Kroll's initial report. First off the report was done by three people not just Kroll. Their collective ideas were presented. The hunting community has been upset since the 90's when deer were behind every tree. The past decade things have gone down hill yet we resist change? I really don't understand some of you. Some of this resentment is obviously politically driven but those guys are obvious to pick out. Wait until the final report is out and then complain if you need to, until then be patient and welcome a possible change to what so many of you complain about.

Look at the northern third of the state where the public land is concentrated. That is where the DNR's management practices have their greatest effect. How is this area doing?

You can't compare that area to areas down south. Many more factors at play besides the DNR. Predators, agricultural land, and logging practices to name a few.

Low numbers of deer, overwhelming number of 1.5 year old bucks shot every year. That is how it is doing.

Paparatzy - There is one parcel of land that is owned that I drive past every day on the way to work. It is by Lannon road and US 41/45. It looks to be excellent wooded low lands for hunting, but is posted that no entry is allowed. This I believe to be a State DOT piece of land, but the DNR also has land where they don't have the funds to mark it, put in parking lots, etc they just keep it closed. Are you familiar with Lowes Lake in Washington County? The DNR hsd parts of that for over 20 years before it was opened. For a very long time it was posted that no access for any reason was allowed. How is this good for the public? As for land that is unused, but open to hunting, you are on your own for that one. I am simply talking about land that is owned by the DNR and other state agencies that is not opened to the public either by being landlocked or just being closed to access for a variety of reasons.

As for Krolls recommendations and how he can help a state that ranks near the top of various trophy books. I won't argue that Wisconsin is generally a great place to hunt, because it is. The reason Wisconsin ranks near the top of the various trophy books is the private landowner. The QDM movement started in Buffalo County and is widespread across the southern 2/3rds of Wisconsin. Hunting is good in this area and is on the upswing again since the season structure and regulations have been relaxed again. The phenomonal big buck hunting is happening because people are passing on deer on their own. People are succeeding in spite of the DNR, not because of them. The DNR has a management plan that only focuses on numbers. They've got a population modeling tool that is based on people shooting the first buck they see and not being selective. Look at the northern third of the state where the public land is concentrated. That is where the DNR's management practices have their greatest effect. How is this area doing?

Great Outdoors- You sound very informed on the fact DNR owns land that is not used. Let us in on all this unused land because I would love to use it. I for one have little faith in a guy from Texas who promotes high fence operations. Wisconsin hunting is so horrible being near the top in number killed and top for trophy bucks that we need this joker coming in and telling us what to do better. "This is my world, not his"

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/forest-land-deal-sets-state-record-du5eq5q-151820355.html

Is this the link you were looking for? The one where Scott Walker and Cathy Stepp are talking about a conservation easement they just purchased on over 67,000 acres, ensuring the land won't be developed and public access will remain.

Everyone hears that the DNR might sell some land and assume that this first thing to go is going to be their favorite state park or public hunting grounds. Fact is, the DNR and other state agencies for that matter are sitting on quite a few acres of land that is not being used by the public and might never get used by the public for various reasons. This only benefits landowners who neighbor these properties. Some properties are landlocked. Some were bought for projects that never materialized or have since been cancelled, etc. Most of us are better off if these lands are sold. Why pay for something you can't use or is used by surrounding landowners instead of the public that foots the bill? Don't worry, Devils Lake State Park isn't going anywhere soon.

Just read that Stepp voiced that the DNR needs to start selling off the State Parks, Forests and Public use lands. Hmmm ...

I'll try to link here

"I don't think privatization will be a big issue. Wisconsin has large County, State, and National Forests. We have a lot of wetlands and other natural areas. With the stewardship fund, we are purchasing new public lands every year."

The DNR is also selling public land. As a nation as we go deeper in debt and not to raise taxes, I would not be surprised to see the DNR futher liquidate land. Also, as land gets more and more private, and as the population grows, more and more pressure will be put onto public land.

"There are plenty of public lands available, but deer management is an issue on many in the northern third. You can find plenty of spots where you can sit all day and not see anyone. Space is not the issue."

Only in certain areas in the north this may be true. Of the county forests, MFL land, and state land it never fails to amaze me how many hunters are present. Used to be I could walk 2 miles in and not see anyone, not the case anymore in many areas.

"EAB was a big deal. In the mid 2000's, if you weren't in EAB, you were likely in an EAB watch unit. The DNR was heavy on the harvest in nearly every unit. Some areas with a large predator base still haven't recovered. Some areas have recovered. Bet everyone was affected by EAB, EAB watch lists, and the aggressive goals."

The aggressive goals certainly! Predator losses would be more tolerable if the DNR didn't set such high antlerless harvests for so many years. EAB has never affected many of us in the north as more public land was available, and winter took out a good portion of the herd many years..

I don't think privatization will be a big issue. Wisconsin has large County, State, and National Forests. We have a lot of wetlands and other natural areas. With the stewardship fund, we are purchasing new public lands every year. There are plenty of public lands available, but deer management is an issue on many in the northern third. You can find plenty of spots where you can sit all day and not see anyone. Space is not the issue.

Texas historically had large ranches as part of their economy. The fragmented nature of Wisconsin's private lands coupled with the topography makes it quite a challenge to mimic Texas.

EAB was a big deal. In the mid 2000's, if you weren't in EAB, you were likely in an EAB watch unit. The DNR was heavy on the harvest in nearly every unit. Some areas with a large predator base still haven't recovered. Some areas have recovered. Bet everyone was affected by EAB, EAB watch lists, and the aggressive goals.

Newsflash, most of the state is already so highly privately owned and expensive it has gotten to be like Texas already. It will only get worse until only the elite will be able to hunt. Looking at the history of hunting as areas get more populated, the entire state will be like Europe soon enough, and only the elite will be able to afford to hunt. It has been moving in this direction every year for the past 50 years, and nothing is going to stop it. The only saving grace is much of WI is publicly owned, but expect further pressure on public land as it just becomes harder for the average guy to afford land of his own to hunt.

Earn a buck removal only will help units that had traditional earn a buck seasons. Much of WI earn a buck wasn't an issue, so the removal of earn a buck will not have any affect on most of the people north of Hwy 29.

Just sharing my Texas experience. Though I don't make much money and am a taxpayer, I shouldn't have to save for years just to be able to hunt in the state that I live in. Guess I just don't want to see the privatization of this, too. I like to be able to get up early in the morning and decide to hunt or fish. And 4 years ago? ... Yes. Much better for me. I got deer that year ... that I got to keep, btw. The next 2 years gun hunters claimed mine. Last year, as I said, I was in Texas a lot. This years looking up with the conceal carry law in place. Concerning Shawno cty, I know guys from Shawno and Keshena who got nice bucks and claimed they saw plenty of deer during the season (mostly bowhunters).

(I call it as I see it. Walker's in charge, is he not?)

GreatOutDoors2001 way to go on your last season. I keep saying things will get better with no earn a buck!!!!!