Lake-Link Home

Southern farmland zone doe tags

10/5/15 @ 2:58 PM
User since 9/25/14
Just got off the phone with dnr staff telling me that I can only harvest a doe in the specified county. Problem is I hunt multiple county's in the southern farmland zone. The areas I hunt are only a few miles apart however two different county's. Dnr staff told me I could buy a bonus tag however I dont need extra deer. I just want to take one doe for the freezer. The staff member said this rule will change back to the way it was next year. Can anybody tell me wants up with this new system?? Are they trying to make money or trying to limit the area a guy can hunt?? Also, anybody have some contact information for me at the dnr so I could express some frustrations??

3/20/16 @ 6:57 PM
User since 9/25/14
Lakeshiner, you still think I'm "greatly exaggerating" on the path of further restrictions that I was predicting last year?? We were on that slope already last year and now falling further down.

And yes, if you hunt or fish for that matter there is a responsibility of knowing before you go afield what game can be harvested and where. Daily!!! Internet connection, really the only way to find out. Come on, there are other ways to report harvest information. If you don't know, don't shoot. Checking daily to find out if otter trapping was still open wasn't hard at all.

And last year all the rule changes. What was said as far as making the counties their own unit!!!??? To cut down on units to make things simpler, Right? Now the cdac wants to create more units by creating new boundaries within counties to do what? Oh yeah make more units and more boundaries to go against the reasoning of last year. And to limit even further where a person can hunt.

VOTE NO!! to question #18

3/20/16 @ 1:44 PM
User since 6/15/01
The drawback to your suggestion is that 600,000 gun hunters are going to have to check online daily to see if their tag is valid. There's lots of complaining and questions right now with the Go Wild license system/no back tags, and wondering how law enforcement can get cell/satellite service in a lot of the areas of the state to check licenses. Now, we're going to expect each hunter to find internet access DAILY to see if their antlerless tag is valid?

That specific question, echoes complaints that even occur regularly here... counties are different from one end to another and harvest should be regulated differently. The north end of Forest County is wooded with no deer, and the south end has ag and seeing crop damage, yet the whole county is under the same goal. Washburn County is the same that I've heard through the grapevine. They lie in the same zone, so the entire county is bound by the same goal.

This year, CDAC's have the option to make Youth antlerless tags invalid. That came from the hunters... zero quota should mean zero quota. So, here you go. In addition, overpopulated counties can initiate an antlerless only hunt... for all deer seasons! Think of that for a second... doe only deer season... gun and bow. Also, each county can control the number of "free" antlerless tags sold with each license for farmland zones... can be 1, or more.

In the next 3 year cycle, there will be an opportunity for counties to adjust boundaries between forest/farmland.

I will agree that there is a slippery slope to be had. What you can't do, is complain that the DNR isn't listening. They are giving us everything everyone is asking for. Yup, there's going to be a point where some counties are going to be worse than it was with DMU's.

We're getting what we ask for. We just need to be reasonable enough to know that just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

3/20/16 @ 12:07 PM
User since 9/25/14
Here we go again, the noose is getting tighter!!!! Blah, blah blah...... Its better for the cdac to have control of the deer population so more times than not they can recommend to increase the herd size. yeah, I get it and I'm for MORE deer opportunity however that's not the path we are going! I said it last year and i'll say it again, why cant we have a statewide doe tag that can be used in units where doe harvest is allowed? All deer harvest data is tracked in real time so the DNR can close a unit when the harvest level has been reached. Done, no more does. Lets not keep taking opportunity away, but fight to increase!!

Here is one post from last year.

10/6/15 11:20 AM CST (edit this post) If you really want control, why not make buck tags county/land spicific? Than you can break the counties down into 4 quadrants and make a hunter further pick a land type!!! When will the restriction end? I'm guessing more to come. Hopefully everyone has only one spot they hunt and don't plan to move around.

Here is the question that will be asked at the spring hearing to yet limit your places an individual can hunt even more!!!!Puke

18. Do you support the practice of allowing County Deer Advisory Councils to divide counties into multiple deer management units?

VOTE NO !!!!!!

(Report Abuse)

3/14/16 @ 7:42 AM
User since 12/7/13
My biggest problem with the youth antlerless tags are that they are being used in a group hunting situation. Probably a lot on drives on public land,further lowering deer population on public land. And let's face it the excess antlerless of the past are no longer a guaranteed thing in the North. From what I can see so far this year after a good spring we still have very very few fawns surviving due to horrific predator management in Wisconsin. As far as I'm concerned no antlerless harvest should mean no antlerless harvest until the deer herd actually starts growing. If the deer population is not so low now in the Northern Forest that it's capable of growing past the WDNR induced predator pit we are currently in right now.

10/16/15 @ 9:13 PM
User since 11/29/01
There is 20,000 sq mi. of land in the northern forest. Almost all of it is deer habitat. That is about 4 does every 10 sq. miles for a doe harvest. I really dont see a problem with the numbers. I do see a problem when kids can shoot a doe with a bow and a gun, or shooting a lot of does. Maybe we should just limit one doe per year with either weapon. We need to be happy with less deer in the freezer. I think we should limit doe tags to one doe per hunter per year for everyone. Sure are a lot of hunters looking for quantity. As for doe tags per county, I think it is a bit much. I chose Washington county for my bow doe tag. Wednesday , I hunted bow the first time this year. I was literally 300 yds from Fon Du Lac co. I think we should have a tag for S.E Wis. public . There is very little difference between Washington, Fon Du Lac, Dodge or Sheboygan co public land hunting. The tag should be good for a few adjoining counties anyhow. My doe tag should say good for S.E Wis. public. If I shoot a doe , I am done shooting does for the bow season.

10/8/15 @ 1:15 PM
User since 5/29/06
I think it's great that the CDAC operates on a 3 year cycle. I just feel that we could get more valuable information if we let the management style run the same course, preferably within the same 3 year cycles. With the amount of variables that we cannot control, I think better decisions could be made in the future if we limited the variables the we had control over. We have the public vs private land tags this year, next year we could have something different and the year after that it could be different again. So when it comes time to reevaluate CDAC goals, how do we know what worked, what didn't, and what info to use to make decisions for the future. I think we are moving in the right direction, just think we could be doing it a little better.

10/8/15 @ 11:50 AM
User since 5/1/05
I am not being argumentative just pointed out that up north with low densities it makes a difference and 7700 deer is a big impact.

People can believe those numbers the DNR throws out but they are far from accurate. At least the area's I hunt up north.

10/8/15 @ 11:04 AM
User since 7/20/09
I'd assume the whole county is not ideal deer habitat, they tend to be in pockets, especially now. If you hunt up there you know you can't just pick a spot out of the blue and expect deer to be there. Far from it. In the farmland you can probably pick a woods and have deer though, quite the contrast. A lot of those people with doe tags driving north are probably hunting public land as well.

Seeing deer is what is the main thing to get kids in the hunt, I'm with GreatOutdoors on that. Give them a free tag and then don't see deer, they won't want to do that again. Heck, adults are that way too. 8 years of free tags though? That is delusional in my opinion, way overkill (pun intended) Tounge Out.

I had a spot last year with 1 doe. Every time I sat I saw her, she was the only one on my camera. Shoot her and I sit and see nothing, that spot is literally shot. Now if people do not move around much and hunt the same areas year to year, and they shoot the does around (they have 8 years to do it), now they are back to not seeing anything and kids getting sick of it. I see the same vehicles in spots year after year, I know people don't all move.

10/8/15 @ 10:58 AM
User since 6/15/01
The current plans for the CDAC's operate on a 3 year cycle. I agree that it's tough to make decisions when things change quickly... but sometimes quick changes need to be made. When you see your pendulum swinging so hard that you know it's going to crash at the end, do you wait or stick your hand out to stop it?

It's new, so in these first couple years changes are being phased in. That kind of hits on your "smaller, more measured steps" too.

Sounds like both are happening.

Nobody has come out against the youth hunt, or the youth tags here. There is no uproar. I'm with you, and quite honestly understand where you are coming from. I have 2 kids that hunt and fish. The youth privileges played (and still play) a big role in their outdoors activities today. All that was brought up was trying to acknowledge and respect underlying management goals while still giving an advantage to youth hunters. They still have the hunt, and still get an antlerless tag until they harvest their 1st deer. Then they follow along with everyone else. They may still have a free tag, it may be a bonus tag, or it may be buck only... depends on the underlying regulations. At some point, it's going to go that way. Is it better when they turn 18, and after 7 years of annual antlerless harvest they become the hunter mentioned earlier (PO'd with a pocket full of tags and no deer) or do they cross that bridge at a younger and more impressionable age when conservation and management can be taught? Either way, the tags go away at some point.

And while giving youth's their own weekend in October, and still providing an added opportunity for harvest of their 1st deer, we can still respect current advantages for our active military and disabled hunters to harvest a deer as well.

"If you need to take my doe tag away to allow kids to harvest one go ahead."

That's what is basically happening. Unfortunately, there is still complaining because we can't go from county to county with a single doe tag anymore.

10/8/15 @ 10:38 AM
User since 2/23/10
Dlama, I appreciate your point but there is a lot more ground in northern wi than 770 square miles. For fear of being argumentative let's look at actually numbers.

Let's take Ashland county. Pretty low deer population. Now let's pretend there is 50/50 doe to buck ratio(this helps your arguement). The reality is probably higher doe amounts but that's ok. In 2014 there were 133 does harvested.

Now to the math. There are 2294 square miles in Ashland county. Again, we will give you the benefit of the doubt at 1/1doe to buck(yes I know the next arguement is I am not tracking fawns but in most populations you are still at more than 50% mature does). So 2294 square miles and a fall 2014 deer total of 8600. Half of those are mature does so 4300. Now divide 133 into 4300 to get kids, veterans, disabled, and any other exempt group killing just north of 3% of does. If we want to look at does harvest per square mile the number is still quite small. 133 into 2294 is .06 does harvested per square mile.

Let's not let emotion get in the way of facts. Cars, bears,wolves and coyotes are all bigger problems in the deer population than kids.

Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.