MENU
Lake-Link Home
LOGIN
Lake-Link
LOG IN

NRB overruled CDAC recommendations

6/28/20 @ 10:58 AM
ORIGINAL POST
madforlabs
User since 12/20/12

The 2020 deer season(s) structure was recently announced. Noteworthy is the fact that the Natural Resources Board led by Kaz (as usual) chose to overturn 11 County CDAC management recommendations. Most of these dealt with antlerless harvest recommendations in Northern counties. 

Irrespective of how one feels about the direction CDAC or NRB have gone with these specific management decisions, seems to me that any legitimacy the CDAC had has just gone out the window. Why invest volunteer effort in local testimony,  committee membership or any other efforts for that matter when Kaz and crew continue to make capricious and (often) unscientific management decisions. 

Hard to believe but Wisconsin appears to be reaching new lows in deer management decision making. 

DISPLAYING 20 TO 29 OF 82 POSTS
FILTER OPTIONS
7/9/20 @ 11:26 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Good post.  Lets fight for reparations due to the mismanagement of the deer herd the past 20+ years.

7/9/20 @ 11:25 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

1. Make the buck tag public or private, or at least the gun buck tag 

From a deer management perspective, this makes little sense.  Doe harvest drives population dynamics.  The benefit it would have is it would potentially increase age structure of bucks on public land.  When the problem is few deer on public land, you protect antlerless deer - restricting buck harvest does little for population.

Restricting buck harvest I am all for - but it is easier to first reduce buck harvest to 1 buck only statewide (choose your weapon) and/or shorten seasons.  However, for the guy that owns 10 acres by his house, he is basically restricting himself to his 10 acres and not allowed to hunt on public land.  Or, he hunts public land and deer don't get hunted on his private land ->exactly the opposite of what the ultimate goal is (increase harvest on private land and decrease it on public land).  

In addition, the issue is hunters with private land are not shooting does on their own land, and utilizing public land for their antlerless/meat grocery shopping hunts.  I see this all the time on the public land I hunt where crews are making drives and filling every public land farmland unit tag they have.  They go back to their private land and sit on their food plots/baits in the evenings waiting for a mature buck.  The same crews have access to hundreds of acres of their own land, but the only ones allowed to shoot antlerless deer on their own land are first time hunters.  These same crews have ruined my deer hunting - opening morning - making drives through large chunks of private land.  They are gone in the afternoon sitting over their food plots.  That is why I quit hunting public land during rifle season in this area. 



7/9/20 @ 11:24 AM
Doug Stange's Evil Twin
User since 9/25/15

Little Luck-

Apparently my sarcasm got in the way of my point- which is twofold:

1) We waste too much energy fighting about deer policy and will never, ever reach a happy solution.

2) So... imagine what other, arguably more important, problems could be addressed if we  redirected some of our energy away from solving an unsolvable puzzle.


As far as hunters funding DNR.  That is true.  So let's create a new funding model that lets hunters off the hook and makes everyone contribute.  Hunting can truly just be for recreation then and with no expectation that it is part of management or revenue.





7/9/20 @ 7:03 AM
LittleLuck
User since 2/16/17

Doug,

Your suggestions do not resemble wildlife management or science at all. If you want to go this route we could get rid of a lot of dnr people whose job relates to deer. Deer license revenue fund a lot of programs with dnr. Have a lot of deer hunters quit money for other dnr programs dries up


7/8/20 @ 11:39 PM
Doug Stange's Evil Twin
User since 9/25/15

Here is the right fix- Let's make this simple.

1. Reduce deer management zones to 1- It's called Wisconsin

2. Sell 1 non-weapon specific deer hunting license. Good news... you just saved 24 dollars.

3. Set harvest quota at 1 buck and 3 does per year, shoot them anywhere you want with whatever weapon is in season.  No tags to apply for. No more CDACS. No more Kaz. 

For all of concern about overharvest, 85% of hunters shoot 1 or 2 deer per year regardless of number of tags, some shoot none, a handful shoot 4 or 5.

"Wah, wah, I want to shoot a buck with my bow and my gun". Tough toenails! You get one.  More bucks survive... people will see bigger bucks... Want meat? Fill your doe tags,

"Some areas get will overharvested." People will stop hunting there when that happens, deer will rebound in a few years, it will work out.  

Best part of all, wildlife professionals might actually get to spend time working on issues that actually matter like climate change, habitat loss, diseases and invasive species and on species other than ... wait for it... DEER.. Rather than having "experts" on these threads bitch about SAK and other such nonsense.




7/8/20 @ 9:31 PM
LittleLuck
User since 2/16/17

How can anyone say SAK is a sound equation. No one can provide a better calculation. It has failed several audits that have shown it's accuracy is plus or minus 121%. Especially at the county or regional level it is terrible yet the dnr keeps using it. Keith Warnke the former chief dnr deer biologist flat out told me he knows it is flawed and it wasn't working in the Central Forest especially.  The reason why there is no deer on public land is because of SAK the dnr issued way too many tags for many years by relying solely on SAK and ignoring other metrics and hunter input.  Using a highly flawed and an inaccurate model is not science at all it is rediculous.  Saying no one can come up with a better calculation is a sorry excuse for using a formula that was instrumental in crashing the deer herd especially up north. Would you balance your checkbook with a formula that's accuracy is plus or minus 121%? Our deer herd in many areas is in sad shape because of SAK and using it over and over again is irresponsible. Every year the kill numbers show it to be wrong.


7/8/20 @ 4:29 PM
Fishsqueezer
User since 5/19/06

1. Make the buck tag public or private, or at least the gun buck tag

2. Tie doe tag purchase eligibility to the choice of buck tag. Hunt both? Sorry but you have to pick one or the other. 

3. No party hunting public land  tags. Assuming moderate compliance, public land deer drives become very limited. 

4. Restore earn a buck (legislation required) as an option of last resort on private lands only. 

None of this would be any less enforceable than what we have now. 


7/8/20 @ 3:40 PM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Hunting on public land is not productive.

The numbers tell us to supply X amount of tags to control the growth of the herd.  But there are not enough hunters to purchase the X amount of tags.  

So we are short on hunters and short on access to where the deer are located.

But access to the deer limits population control and hunter success. 

Right there is the problem, and was actually being discussed (better late than never) at the NRB meeting.  The historical solution to control the herd in the entire unit was just to issue more antlerless tags on public land - those tags actually get purchased and used.  You simply cannot force private land hunters to shoot the does on their land and not use their tags on public land.  I feel that public land has been even ravaged more since the creation of the public/private thing in my farmland unit as everyone who buys a tag gets a free public land antlerless permit with every license they purchase.  The simple solution is to stop allowing the option of getting a public land bonus permit at time of license purchase.  Allow private only, and divvy up the public land tags by sale of $12 bonus tags on a limited basis.  Problem solved on public land.  Private land issues will never be solved.

The SAK equation is sound.  No one can provide a better calculation.

I have studied the SAK method and I agree it makes sense.  However, something is clearly lacking.  There are discrepancies that cannot be ignored between the formula and deer sightings.  How the SAK can say we had more deer in 2019 vs. 1980,1990, etc.....doesn't make sense.  We have many more antlerless tags, more seasons, longer seasons, youth hunters, better weapons, more car traffic, infinitely more wolves, and more bobcats and bears.  Doesn't take a rocket scientist to say that this should equate to less deer.

7/8/20 @ 9:05 AM
trouter
trouter
User since 7/3/01

The uneven distribution of deer in our county and the lack of hunters combined with the 25% success rate is the problem we face in Adams County.

Most deer are on private land that limits access or limits the number of deer than can be harvested.   Hunters who hunt on land that does not support deer see few if any deer.  

Hunting on public land is not productive.

The numbers tell us to supply X amount of tags to control the growth of the herd.  But there are not enough hunters to purchase the X amount of tags.  

So we are short on hunters and short on access to where the deer are located.

The number of tags made available is based on supply and demand.  We know how many tags are sold every year and we base tags on demand, not on any other factor.

The SAK equation is sound.  No one can provide a better calculation.  

But access to the deer limits population control and hunter success.  

7/8/20 @ 8:30 AM
Farnorthbadger
User since 12/7/13

Fake SAK numbers continue to be the real driver behind Wisconsin deer management . Do not forget we were told that there was a near record 1.8 million Wisconsin deer population here in fall 2019. That was immediately  followed by one of the worst Wisconsin rifle seasons in a generation. To follow that up CDACs pretended the  dismal 2019 rifle season didn’t happen and tried setting antlerless tags like it was 1995 here again. The numbers simply do not and cannot add up , hunters will continue quitting in droves if we don’t get honest deer management from our state . 

DISPLAYING 20 TO 29 OF 82 POSTS
Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.