From the outside looking in...
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 9:54:46 AM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
I've been sitting and thinking about this for a little while. Lately with the economy the way that it is, there has been a lot of questioning about how I do my job and if just anyone can do the same job as effectively.
I'll be the first to admit that I've been critical of the WI DNR. In my experiences in the woods that I hunt there have been a lot of changes. Logging, ownership changes, lack of and/or excessive hunters in specific areas, changes of hunting styles, etc. over the past 10-15 years that I've been hunting in WI. I believe that a lot of people forget that these things go on and don't reealize just what effect they have on deer in these areas.
Now, put yourself in the biologists shoes. You know what is right to do for the resource, but in Wisconsin (probably most places anymore) it is not just cut and dried. You also have to take into consideration the opinion of the public, which is not always educated to the specific problem or emotionally doesn't want to hear the correct answer to the specific problem because of a real or percieved ill consequence to their personal way of hunting or doing things. Any more you have to consider political lobbyists and there politicians or you'll be out on you butt.
As easy as it is to sit and criticize the WI DNR for seemingly doing a hack job lately, one has to look at the whole picture and understand what is really going on. While population calculators may need to be tweeked, or other circumstances given more weight in their effect on the populations, you also have to consider the social ramifications that are constantly be imposed on them too. They increasingly can not do anything that adversly affects even the smallest of special interest groups.
It's not just as simple as getting new blood into these positions. For the new blood will undoubtedly come under fire of the same conditions and possibly cow more to the special interests than the current department has.
< Message edited by Dan Salmon -- 10/18/2009 9:55:48 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 11:00:43 AM
|
|
|
Goose
Posts: 2347
Joined: 8/20/2008
From: Eastern Farmland
Status: offline
|
Great post. I feel the same way.
_____________________________
Jake
Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 3:53:42 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
Thanks Goose. Sometimes I think people need to take a step back and get some perspective on the situation. Like most everything, there usually is not a definate right/wrong answer to the question or problem at hand.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 7:42:17 PM
|
|
|
Wolf River Hunter
Posts: 127
Joined: 1/6/2009
Status: offline
|
So because the WI DNR has a "tough" job they get a free pass on poor job performance? The Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, Minnesota DNR, etc. have the same tough issues the WI DNR faces and I don't see anyone rounding up the torches and pitchforks in their forums. I have a tough job also, I have to make projections everyday. If my projections were as flawed as the WI DNR's in reguards to wolf, deer, and bear population I wouldn't have a job. I absolutely believe "new blood" is needed, not across the board, just at the top. Keith Warnke absolutely needs to go. There are regional state biologists that I think do a wonderful job that do not support Warnke's agenda. Since Warnke came aboard, does anyone feel the state has headed in the "right" direction? What about Warnke's past history? Does anyone support that? I know the DNR gets thrown under the bus as a whole and that probably isn't fair to the people involved that actually do a good job.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 7:58:16 PM
|
|
|
Goose
Posts: 2347
Joined: 8/20/2008
From: Eastern Farmland
Status: offline
|
WRH, you bring up good points as well. Every decision that they make is not right. I dislike the early Tzone and also this new proposal, but if your concern is the amount of deer in your area. I ask you, who shot all of the deer?
_____________________________
Jake
Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 8:14:45 PM
|
|
|
Wolf River Hunter
Posts: 127
Joined: 1/6/2009
Status: offline
|
I'll be the first person to admit I initially believed what the DNR said. "Shoot does" was the battle cry of the DNR and many publications such as D&DH. If I was to be a responsible hunter it was my duty to do what was best for the heard so yes, I shot does. Stupid me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 8:33:48 PM
|
|
|
Goose
Posts: 2347
Joined: 8/20/2008
From: Eastern Farmland
Status: offline
|
I wouldn't say "stupid me", you did what was biologically right, but in todays hunting world people expect to see deer behind every tree because of the population explosion in the late 90's and early 00's. I believe that we got a little spoiled and even lost some woodsmanship in those times.
I honestly believe that we will never see that again, and everything from a biologic and even social standpoint says that its a good thing.
I honestly would love to see 20 deer on every outing, but that isn't going to happen.
I have chosen to stop blaming everything else and just do what I, as a conservationist, can do to help my own situation.
_____________________________
Jake
Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 9:34:29 PM
|
|
|
Whitetailaddict
Posts: 118
Joined: 2/2/2009
From: Washburn county WI
Status: offline
|
I completely agree with you wolf river. We haven't been headed in the right direction for a long time. There are many states with great biologists, and I think it's about time WI was one of them. Ever since Warnke came around we've just gone down hill, and it's time he leaves, and we get someone that can do a better job.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 9:41:32 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
I'm not giving anyone a free ride. I'm just saying that its a heck of a lot easier to be a Monday morning quarterback than it is to be the guy in the moment.
You are also right about the job performance of certain individuals. The only professional people that I know with almost complete job security are architects and weathermen. They are consistently the only people that can be wrong everytime and still have a paycheck at the end of the week. I guess that it also applies to political appointments too.
I agree with Goose. We were told to shoot does and we did. Some seasons more than a million antlerless permits were available, there were record harvests. Some areas that were overpopulated, like the zone I hunt in are now back to near goal or under goal, and there are not nearly as many deer, but they are still there. You have to work a little more to get some opportunites.
I don't think you'll see as large an opportunity to kill antlerless deer in the northern areas that are below goal for a couple years, but if there are a bunch of mild winters again you may just see odles of permits available. It's a balancing act, and I don't think that the average joe public deer hunter has the desire to stay on top of it. They just want to go out and enjoy themselves and shoot a deer. With the herd the way it has been for the past decade, joe public deer hunter now feels entitled to see a deer everytime they enter the woods. That's not healthy in a lot of the areas of the north.
I speak in relation to the area I hunt. I have very little knowledge of souther Wisconsin deer hunting as I do not own land and it seems to be the only way to have access there. So it is possible that we are talking about two completely different circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 10:15:41 PM
|
|
|
Whitetailaddict
Posts: 118
Joined: 2/2/2009
From: Washburn county WI
Status: offline
|
I hunt in the north (zone 9) too Dan so i know exactly what you mean. I really don't expect to see a lot of deer, but i do want to see some deer. I agree it's a balancing act but I think it is the stupidest thing ever that the DNR wants to add all these seasons and kill all these deer when the northern part of the state has so few right now. I think the deer herd runs in cycles, but saying we need to kill more deer in areas where there aren't many is just wrong. Now i know when we're at goal we become a regular unit, but i think by the time our northern units become regular (like this year), it's too late and it will take several years to get reasonable deer numbers back.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 11:06:25 PM
|
|
|
gruberr
Posts: 18
Joined: 8/10/2009
Status: offline
|
Good discussion guys.
Goose and Dan, I sure hope you are not voting in favor of the latest proposals. The early firearm season is a terrible, terrible idea, esp because WI allows rifles in many of the units. We only need to look at Michigan and Minnesota as to what our herd will look like in 3-5 years. I prefer not to have a herd made up of 1.5 yr old bucks and badly out of balanced gender ratios.
Why can't they see the KEY to making Illinois and Iowa the 2 top states in the country: KEEP firearms OUT of the primary rut. In fact they only allow shotguns and muzzleloaders. I doubt WI hunters will ever give up their rifles. I can live with rifles, but putting 600,000 hunters in the woods in mid November armed w rifles I can't. I know what will happen. For Keith Warnke to state the buck population will not be depleted under this season framework is very misleading. He knows better than that.
Here are some other DNR decisions that just dig at me:
Population Goals
I'm probably in the minority on this, but I generally believe the population estimates the DNR has put out out in the past, in fact I think they underestimate some areas of the state, such as where I hunt in western WI.
W/o spending a whole lot of money they could do a whole lot to convince the general public of these estimates by picking a unit or two each year from each of the 4 quarters of the state and do over winter helicopter surveys. No one should be able to argue with actual visual evidence of population versus the FUZZY math contained inside SAK (I have a degree in mathematics and can't say I fully understand SAK, but being off on any of those input parameters can easily throw off the final output one way or the other). Iowa is a state that heavily relies on arial surveys to determine post hunt populations. They also rely on deer vehicle car crashes. WI does neither. I don't understand why not.
That all said, where I most strongly disagree with DNR are our population goals of 20 deer/square mile post hunt and their claim there are too many deer for the biological carrying capacity of the land. Nothing could be further from the truth. If it were true, we would not be seeing does with twin and sometimes triplet fawns. We would not be seeing the incredibly huge bucks that are being harvested all over the state. How could such a large percent of the herd survived the last 2 tough winters and still reproduce like it has if it is so over-populated? The TRUTH is that even with the claimed "over-populated" herds of today, they are still well BELOW the biological carrying capacity K. Keith Warnke has personally acknowledged that to me in an email conversation I had with him a couple years back. His reasoning for the 20 deer per square mile goal is that WI does not have enough hunters to keep ahead of the yearly recruitment a 30/40 deer per square mile would produce. I strongly disagree with that. EAB has proven we can stay on top of the herd. It was just over-used and now we have units under even the very low DNR population goals.
Foresters can't get anything to grow
This is one of the big changes in the last 20 years no one seems to want to talk about... mostly everyone today does SELECTIVE harvesting versus CLEARCUT and for a good reason, it makes economic and future yield sense.
However, you can't get oak tree (aka blue bush) to grow in partial shade. Whether the population is 20 dpsm or 40 dpsm, deer will find and browse oak seedlings when SELECTIVE harvesting is occuring. Only a clearcut will provide the required sunlight that it takes to provide enough oak seedling generation to withstand what wildlife can throw at it. Ever wonder what happened to grouse in the southern 2/3 of the state.... no clearcuts around to support them. I miss those days of having grouse around.
Deer car collisions
Retch Sweeney has provided concrete information we are crashing into deer today the same rate per billion miles driven as in 1983. And that's with today's faster driving. I wish they would plot these crashes on a map and throw out all crashes that occur within a mile or two of a city. I would bet the rate is really really down. Those are deer that for the most part are not accessible to hunters. I don't do a lot of driving myself, but I do make 20-30 trips a year from central WI over to western WI where I grew up. I do have to say this year is the least amount of deer I've seen killed on the roads since I can ever remember. Just today I drove from Marshfield over to Buffalo County and back (total of 6 hours of driving). I saw 3 dead deer on the roads and two of them looked to be several weeks old and this is mid Oct.
BTW: If you like fall colors and are ever in western WI in mid Oct, treat yourself to the spectacular views of the towering bluffs and deep valleys/coulees of Buffalo County. I had the time of my life today and now I fully understand why deer are able to reach maturity over there. Man that is some rough country! I grew up in Durand and am very familiar with northern Buffalo County, but the southern 2/3 is something else to see. There's got to be deer down there that never see humans.
Crop Damage
Couple weeks ago I obtained the full listing of farmers enrolled in the crop damage program for 2009. In the two counties I hunt in, there is 1 farmer enrolled. I have two cousins in those counties. They both do have some crop damage, but basically they say "sure would be nice to have a few more kernals of corn coming into the combine from the outside rows". They leave it at that. I don't deny there are places with lots of damage. Many of those farms have decided to lease out there lands. I also understand the Farm Bureau wasn't even there the day this latest proposal was voted on by the EAB alternative commitee. I wonder which way they would have voted had they been there? I suspect they would vote for putting the extra days on the other side of the current season. Many farmers are still going to be in the fields during these early seasons, esp during late crop seasons like this year is turning out to be.
Early Oct Hunts
From a safety concern, it is absolutely insane to allow people to hunt w rifles in early to mid Oct. For certain they should not be allowed on public lands. You can't possibly expect hunters to realize what is several hundred yards beyond a target with all the green still around. Only shotguns and muzzleloaders should be allowed during these hunts. You will never ever find me out there in any of these seasons no matter how bad the population gets. I guess it will have to take someone getting injured or killed before they would ever even discuss the safety aspect. That will be a shame. Deer populations are not that out of control to put 1 person's life at risk to have these hunts.
Itchy Trigger Fingers
Goose, you are 100% correct on where some of the blame needs to be placed. The DNR and the wardens are not the ones pulling the triggers. We are. Anyone who is harvesting more deer than they can eat is not helping the situation. Unfortunately the framework allows this. I know of one individual who harvested 9 deer with the bow one year and was not shy about it... all of it done over a bait pile. Man that just burns me up. I better stop right there.
Good luck to you's over the upcoming weeks. We are just a week or two from the peak chase phase!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/18/2009 11:10:42 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
I guess that I don't believe that they are going to allow a DMU that is at or below goal become a "kill zone" like so many think.
For instance, in DMU 41 where I hunt, the number of antlerless permits that were available this year was 1,300. The DNR claims that DMU 41 is within +/-20% of goal population. This would seem consistent with the number of Hunter's Choice permits that were available in this zone before all the Zone T hunts started happening. Just 2 years ago there were 9,000 antlerless permits available in this DMU. Last year was a slim year for deer sightings, I'm hoping this year is better.
I think what the DNR is trying to accomplish with allowing a 16 day season is a little more opportunity for the optimum amount of deer to be harvested and not be affected by storms, etc. Also allowing hunters that only have time to be out on opening weekend another weekend option that they may not have otherwise available to hunt.
I beiliev and think that the DNR believes that this season structure would allow the yearly harvest numbers to be more consistent and aid in predicting population estimates and antlerless permit availabilty with less possibilty of killing way to many deer in one single year and having to recover for several years after.
The additional gun & muzzelloader seasons, historically haven't really amounted to much of the yearly harvest numbers. I don't think that these will make much difference to the numbers. Possibly the much more liberal season dates of the archery season could, but I doubt that adding time to the end of the season will make much difference. The hardcore hunters are the ones out in December now, just because you can hunt into January isn't going to get any additional "Blue Bird" (stealing the phrase from waterfowl hunters) hunters to go out in the cold and wait for a deer to walk by.
On the cover it looks like the DNR is trying to kill every deer in the state, but the changes largely would seem to be ineffectual to me.
I guess its like the old saying " Opinions are like elbows, everyone has a couple."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/19/2009 12:22:15 AM
|
|
|
Goose
Posts: 2347
Joined: 8/20/2008
From: Eastern Farmland
Status: offline
|
gruberr- Believe it or not, I am actually in line with you.
I think that your post was great, but I disagree with the crop damage part. Around here its crazy.
Also, at one of the meetings I attended, I talked to a biologist for our area afterwards and asked him about aerial surveys and he told me that they have done aerial surveys over controlled (fenced in) areas and where off up to 40%.
I also agree with you and retch on the dvc's, I think at minimum it would be a great tool for trends.
I also don't agree with T-zones in Oct., EAB, muzzleloader season after gun season (the current way), the eradication area, and this new proposal.
There, its all out on the table.
I also say that when you point your finger at somebody, theres a couple pointing back at you.
_____________________________
Jake
Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/19/2009 2:14:21 PM
|
|
|
buckhunter21
Posts: 2378
Joined: 4/25/2008
From: West-Central WI
Status: offline
|
quote:
I have chosen to stop blaming everything else and just do what I, as a conservationist, can do to help my own situation.
I think that sums it up. YOU are the one that knows what your deer carrying capacity is, so YOU should manage your property effectively for the way you want it. Granted, most private properties in WI are 80-100 acres or less, and it's hard to manage your herd yourself since deer have a broader home range, but bottom line I think more hunters need to do this and quit shooting 10 deer on a 40 acre parcel since 'the dnr gave me 10 tags so that means I should shoot 10 deer.'
Am I a fan of the WDNR? No, but what I stated above would help.
Dan, sounds like you work for the DNR? :)
_____________________________
QDM!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/19/2009 6:41:58 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
I don't work for the WDNR. I just like to have an open mind toward things that I don't know everything about. Which is pretty much everything.
This is starting to sound like typical American greed. Do you work for AIG? The Obama Administration? Private property owners in the State of Wisconsin do not own the free ranging deer that live on their property any more than I do. When that mentality goes away, maybe, the DNR has a chance at being able to do exactly what good biology dictates.
The problem with Quality Deer Management in the public realm without large acreage is that this ownership mentality that develops. Outside of a high fence, I own just as much of the deer as they do on their land. Trophy hunting is killing deer hunting in this state more than the DNR ever has.
< Message edited by Dan Salmon -- 10/19/2009 8:00:50 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/19/2009 7:34:43 PM
|
|
|
Whitetail 101
Posts: 16
Joined: 9/26/2009
Status: offline
|
Dan,
You are begining to sound like an Obama Plant .
You realy do seem to be on the outside looking in.
You seem to want socialism ?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/19/2009 7:59:31 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
You are incorrect. I'm not at all for Obama or quack science (read Global Wraming). All I'm saying is that deer are a public resource.
My quip about Obama and AIG was aimed at people who claim to know better than the current group, but never seem to end up doing anything better, in fact, most times all they really change is the status quo to benefit themselves and their allies.
It seems to me, that the DNR is trying to practice quality deer management on a macro scale to make opportunity for anyone that wants to reasonably have a chance at shooting a deer greater. They have all these private landowners are in essence trying to hoard the resource for their own benefit. Don't you think that working together instead of againt each other would make more sense?
I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night too.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/20/2009 2:21:17 AM
|
|
|
Goose
Posts: 2347
Joined: 8/20/2008
From: Eastern Farmland
Status: offline
|
Dan, I agree with you and understand what you are saying. I know it sounds like I am playing both sides but in a way I feel both sides are right. I, from a personal standpoint would love to see tons of deer every night and have everyone in camp be successful, but I also understand the other views from a biologic standpoint.
The most natural deer herd I can think of is that in Canada's big bush. What are their buck to doe ratios? 1 to 1. How many deer do you see on stand there? Not many.
When you bring in man and all of his complications, it gets,well, rather complicated.
I really believe that science points to less deer and that is something we may have to accept.
Is that what I personally want? No, but I can understand the logic behind it.
_____________________________
Jake
Genesis 27:3 Take your bow and quiver full of arrows out into the open country, and hunt some wild game.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/20/2009 1:55:27 PM
|
|
|
buckhunter21
Posts: 2378
Joined: 4/25/2008
From: West-Central WI
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dan Salmon
I don't work for the WDNR. I just like to have an open mind toward things that I don't know everything about. Which is pretty much everything.
This is starting to sound like typical American greed. Do you work for AIG? The Obama Administration? Private property owners in the State of Wisconsin do not own the free ranging deer that live on their property any more than I do. When that mentality goes away, maybe, the DNR has a chance at being able to do exactly what good biology dictates.
The problem with Quality Deer Management in the public realm without large acreage is that this ownership mentality that develops. Outside of a high fence, I own just as much of the deer as they do on their land. Trophy hunting is killing deer hunting in this state more than the DNR ever has.
Sorry if I hit a nerve Dan, I was only joking! And no, I don't work for AIG, but I do work in the financial services industry and I love it, thanks for asking.
I never said anything about ownership of the deer....Or weren't you talking to me?
_____________________________
QDM!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: From the outside looking in... - 10/20/2009 5:52:30 PM
|
|
|
Dan Salmon
Posts: 73
Joined: 5/5/2008
From: Kenosha, WI
Status: offline
|
Talking in generalities, no finger pointing. No offense taken, was just a smart a** retort on my end.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
Printable Version
