MENU
Lake-Link Home
LOGIN
Lake-Link
LOG IN

2019 Gun Deer Final Numbers

12/3/19 @ 12:08 PM
ORIGNAL POST
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Just released, 2019 vs. 2018: Total buck kill down 28.6%, total harvest down 24.9%.  Northern Forest region was the worst: buck kill down 39.5%, total harvest down 38.2%.

Post opening weekend quote: "In 2018, we held the earliest possible deer season followed by the latest possible season in 2019. This occurred between the 2012-13 and 2007-08 seasons as well, and we saw similar declines in opening weekend registration totals," said DNR big game ecologist Kevin Wallenfang. 

2012 antlered harvest: 119,469

2013 antlered harvest: 102,221, drop of 14.5%

2007 antlered harvest: 133,107

2008 antlered harvest: 103,845, drop of 22%

Yes, there were decreases if you only look at the variable as stated by DNR above.  Total harvest of 75,236 bucks in 2019 tells another story.  Even in the worst years, the total buck kill was down 25% on top of the decrease "due to a late start to the season."  The buck kill was down 19% from the lowest buck kill numbers in the last 13 years.  We are on a continued and readily apparent trend downward.

As I posted in another thread, pick the year and you get the same excuses from DNR: standing crops, no snow, late start date to season, and the best of all "lack of hunter effort."

Most of us had record snowfalls late in the season which has never been seen before.  The Winter Severity Index does not properly account for deep snow or extreme cold.  -1 degree counts the same as -30 degrees, and 18" of snow counts the same as 40" of snow according to their system.  I feel a lot of deer died last winter/spring, but we were told we had a record population and a moderate winter even though hundreds of barn roofs collapsed from all the snow.

Since we as hunters failed, and did not do our part to reduce this out of control population as DNR has told us about, I suspect DNR will offer more doe tags, more seasons, more weapons, and longer seasons since we all obviously are failing at hunting.  

I am guessing the number of licenses sold next year will drop even faster with the winter we are already having.  

DISPLAYING 31 TO 40 OF 211 POSTS
FILTER OPTIONS
12/21/19 @ 11:24 PM
outfishin
MEMBER since 1/14/13

Couple more. It’s honestly pretty miraculous that we get so many photos of wolves in vilas considering there’s only 36.... smh

12/21/19 @ 11:14 PM
outfishin
MEMBER since 1/14/13

Just a few of the many

12/21/19 @ 11:01 PM
outfishin
MEMBER since 1/14/13

The wolf population numbers are absolutely ridiculous. Between me and a buddy we run about 15-20 cameras a year around vilas. I’m pretty sure we had wolf pics on every camera. Almost always loners. Not saying the wolves captured on camera are not part of a pack but the photos and tracks I’ve witnessed are always 1-2 wolves. That goes for actual sightings as well. So why do they claim there’s no loners? Every bit of my experience suggests otherwise.

12/21/19 @ 10:43 PM
ihookem
ihookem
User since 11/29/01

Camp 2 dukes's embedded Photo

12/20/19 @ 11:43 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Wow...I was correct for once in my life (DNR website):

Eligibility:

Be accessible to the public by foot, by public road or from other land open to public access, if the parcel is designated as MFL “Open” land. 

320 acres max per municipality for Closed.


12/20/19 @ 11:20 AM
Drahts
User since 9/8/17

You could be right JC.  This is where I found that table...https://woodlandinfo.org/files/2017/09/FR-295.pdf

12/20/19 @ 11:05 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

"I saw some numbers in Upper Michigan last week and how the wolf kill numbers are more than the gun kill numbers just by taking wolf numbers times 20 deer a year. "

Something similar is floating around for WI counties....showing the same thing.  These numbers also don't include bobcat, bear, and coyote kills.  Truly stunning.

12/20/19 @ 11:04 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Honestly I haven't kept up on the recent changes...but my understanding is they either got rid of the maximum requirement of acreage lately or greatly expanded it under the closed program.  I also believe that land enrolled in MFL-O now MUST have designated access points for public use.

12/20/19 @ 10:20 AM
Drahts
User since 9/8/17

JC-

My understanding of the MFL in this state is that you are NOT required to allow access.  The way it's set up you get the tax break and then pay a bit over a dollar an acre if you do allow access and over 8 dollars an acre if you don't every year.  You are limited to 160 acres in the program I think.  You also have to manage the land as the county dictates including logging.  Land locked properties are sometimes tough to put in the program because the owner may not be able to get logs out when dictated, and you must.

** The first column shows the old program, the second column shows the new

Open to public access 

$0.67/acre 

$1.67/acre 

Closed to public access 

$1.57/per acre 

$8.34/acre 



12/20/19 @ 7:59 AM
ihookem
ihookem
User since 11/29/01

I saw some numbers in Upper Michigan last week and how the wolf kill numbers are more than the gun kill numbers just by taking wolf numbers times 20 deer a year. This tell me  We need to see a 56% increase in the state buck kill numbers next year for the gun season and a 100 % increase in the buck kill in Lincoln county next year for the buck kill numbers.

DISPLAYING 31 TO 40 OF 211 POSTS
Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.