Lake-Link Home

NRB overruled CDAC recommendations

6/28/20 @ 10:58 AM
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. 

7/1/20 @ 8:30 AM
User since 2/16/17


I have talked to NRB members and they aren't using arbitrary gut management decisions.  They look at the metrics for the counties and what has been happening historically. They have spent considerable time looking at lots of data. For you to make a statement that you did seems ill informed , a gut reaction. I am willing to bet some of the board members spend more time than the cdac members, local Dnr biologists and foresters before they make their decisions. They don't want to over rule the cdacs unless absolutely necessary. Short sighted not at all. They are looking long term at the deer population especially on public lands up north where deer populations for the most part are in terrible shape. Hunters are QUITTING because the deer hunting sucks so bad on public land up north. If the dnr biologists and foresters weren't giving bogus information mainly with highly inaccurate SAK population estimates to influence the cdacs the NRB wouldn't have to step in. The dnr helps cherry pick some of the cdac members who they know will go along with their failed management of deer. If anything the NRB is trying to do what they can to improve deer populations and deer hunting on public lands. Also stopping the hemorrhaging of hunters leaving the sport and not bringing in new hunters.  I wouldn't consider that to be short sided and something that will come back to haunt us or the NRB. Some of the cdac members need to stand up to the dnr and the foresters ignore some of their crap and really look at the data and make informed decisions not just follow what dnr says as the dnr has failed at deer management for over 25 years. Maybe some cdac members just want the ability to shoot more does when not needed so it doesn't take much for the dnr to influence them. People need to remember the cdacs members don't get paid and give a lot of time but also remember the NRB members are not paid and give even more time to help manage resources. 

7/1/20 @ 7:45 AM
User since 12/7/13

Beer I thought CDACs were set up to have both sides represented in each county with a fair vote ? 6-2 rigged elections is why the NRB has to step in .Getting involved should have nothing to do with it , it should be fair and balanced from the start. My main complaint with CDACs from day one is that they were rigged to end up with lower deer numbers while seeming to give hunters a voice. If CDACs were set up fairly the NRB would have no reason to step in . Giving a DMAP Rep who knows nothing whatsoever about deer or hunting a vote  while not allowing both the CC chair and vice chair to represent hunters with a vote is foolish and will drive hunters away from the sport.

Urban Dictionary: rigged

1. The word rigged is used to describe situations where unfair advantages are given to one side of a conflict. 2. Describes the side of the a conflict that holds an unfair advantage

7/1/20 @ 6:12 AM
User since 12/20/12

Right Little Luck, lets encourage Kaz and Co. to override the system and make even more arbitrary "gut" management decisions.  Its not like that won't come back to haunt us at some point....

Short sighted thinking.

6/30/20 @ 11:02 PM
User since 2/16/17


I encourage you and others who believe the NRB acted responsibly in their decisions to override cdacs especially for public land up north to email Laurie Ross who is the dnr liaison to the NRB and tell her you support the boards decision and appreciate it.

6/30/20 @ 10:14 PM
User since 6/15/01

The DNR does not place people in seats, the Chair and vice chair review applications. I got about a 8-10 applications to go through, including calling references. The hunting community has the same opportunity to solicit members as any other group.

Also, at least 3 members must have bought a deer license in 7 of the last 10 years. Thats minimum. This last cycle, every member on our CDAC was a current deer license holder.

Get involved, or get what you worked for.

6/30/20 @ 9:19 PM
User since 12/7/13

 The Forestry CDAC seat is one of 8 voting seats. 4 of those seats are filled by those who would/should have a healthy deer herd and a quality deer hunting opportunity as a priority:  Chair, Tourism, Hunt Club, and DMAP. Its no stacked deck. Thats 50/50.

The chair can vote to make or break a tie.

So CDACs essentially are set up with only two and possibly 3 pro hunter seats on any vote Beer? How rigged could the CDAC vote get against hunters  if the DMAP seat is placed there by the foresters and knows nothing whatsoever about deer or hunting ? At least in my county its was set up by our WDNR to be a 6-2 vote against sound deer management and hunters . In the rest of the state it’s just a 5-3 vote against hunters unless other places were rigged with a DMAP rep of the same caliber.  . That’s the problem with the CDACs in a nutshell , they are dishonest and a bit of a farce to begin with . If they were run honestly with both CC chair and vice chair getting a vote things would even out a whole lot. DMAP reps should have a hunting background and should know something about whitetail deer also . A DMAP rep repeating talking points about how horrible deer are to the landscape is a terrible joke on hunters and recreational landowners paying a large tax bill for horrific deer  management in this state . All in all the CDACs are a great idea if they could be run fairly and competently by our WDNR and legislature . As is they are nothing but a farce and it’s no wonder folks won’t waste their time on them .It’s also no wonder that the NRB has to override them . I do give a huge thanks to many of the CCs and many other seats putting their time in on these CDACs and working hard for the many sportsman in the state . It’s a thankless job for the most part with flak coming from all sides on almost any decision made . Let’s make it fair and make it work , even up the votes and watch how compromise happens when both sides have to give a bit . 

6/30/20 @ 8:51 PM
User since 6/15/01

Now is the time for accountability, application period is open for all seats, in all counties. Get involved, or get just what you worked for.

6/30/20 @ 8:15 PM
User since 9/25/14

Wow!!! Thanks NRB for hearing the voices of the hunters that have been stating their concerns for years for Northern Oconto county herd! A zero quota is needed!  After getting a reply from the biologist stating the benefits of having doe tags maybe it's time for accountability! Thanks NRB!!

6/30/20 @ 7:42 PM
User since 4/17/07

beertown- I will email them tomorrow! 

6/30/20 @ 7:38 PM
User since 10/8/01

Thanks for the attachment BTF.  I see NRB lowered public land tags by 50% in Sawyer County.  I listened in to the 2 Sawyer County CDAC meetings and I was hoping they'd recommend a lower number than they did.  This overrule helps, but just a little as 80% of the tags were designated for private lands, so the 50% reduction to public land tags is really a small decrease in this county.

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