Wisconsin DTR meeting live video today

You may have missed the question in my above post. Are you a degreed wildlife biologist?

Are you saying the DNR is responsible for the quality of the antler size of the deer in WI now? Can you explain that one for me?

 

Economics-Madison. Bar stool biologists bashing the DNR is the norm. Yes, I appreciate the DNR's work especially dealing with hunters who can never have enough deer. Use the DNR's 80 dpsm as a baseline #. Would You want that # to double? Triple? They have to walk a tight rope between the hunter vs. the farmer, forester, Geico, treehuggers. Managing people, I mean deer is not math. 3x3 never equals 9.
EAB produced more book deer then ever before in Wisconsin.

 

OK, thought you were a biologist.

3x3 always equals 9, thats the problem the DNR has.

Your questions don't really come close to what you need to look at and hence have no answer. However, we DO know the abuses SAK was subjected to and why the estimates were so wrong, decimating the populations in many areas. When you base a deer density on "I saw a bunch of deer in a field", you have already created a huge error.

 

If You watch the video feed from last weekend the 52 volunteer hunters who are driving 12 round trips to St.Point and giving up 12 Saturdays all voted to support the SAK model which is interesting with electronic registration next year. Wisconsin is the only in person registration state left.
After 37 years of hunting the same dirt and over 50 book deer pulled of the same dirt I know what I am looking at beyond counting deer in a winter rye plot. I passed 87 gun bucks last year. How about 150 deer on a 4 acre December foodplot? 98% of hunters are oblivious to the signs of permanent deer damage and over population.

 

SAK is not bad... it was the abuse of the long standing measured constants that caused the problem. You can't work backwards from a conclusion, which became common practice.

I have seen deer overpopulation... it did exist. However, it was overharvested rapidly. It is not "permanent". And our habitat management is poor. Lots of people who see a pocket of deer make the mistake of jumping on overpopulation as the problem because they don't see the bigger picture. If you plant plots to attract deer and created a pocket of density, extrapolating that farther than your circle of influence is also a big error.

 

Well this is entertaining....


What's wrong with single digit densities? You cheese-heads are wussies when it comes to wolves too

 

Whats wrong with those levels? Why should we suffer those levels and why have DECADES without decent harvest? The worst part of it is they are claiming it is higher.

Yeah, you can take all our wolves. How many you want? Ship back pheasants.

 

I like how hunters only remember the record high populations of the late 90s early 2000s, and somehow expect that it should always be like that.

And you can ship the wolves back, but they are the weak ones that had to displace in the first place. I'm sure they'd happily correct your CWD problems for you.

 

Have you followed our herd in northern areas? The word DECIMATED comes up a lot.

Wait, CWD is coming to a state near you soon. My prediction? You will have your first positives in 2014.

 

I've hunted Washburn CO every year since 1994. The numbers we see change every year, and this year was pretty slow. However, the land we hunt has changed immensely over that kind of timeframe. Cuts, growth, hunting pressure... it all changes, it's all in cycles.

Southern MN had CWD a couple years ago. Won't be discovered in my area for a long time, if ever. Like I said, wolves were evolved to cut the sickness out of herd animals. And they are good at their job.

They'll even help with you coyote population (and stray dogs & cats).

 

Actually, my neighbor has had several cats disappear... then I got the fisher pics. I'm betting they are efficient.

Deer do fluctuate. But they should not go from boom to bust overnight. Mismanagement and miscounts were the entire issue. Now we have places where no one will see deer for years. It all began with the panic. Yep, we had too many deer. But the fake counts for several years crushed many populations. For no good reason. From 100 deer a day sightings to 1 deer a season. Thats gross mismanagement any way you slice it, going in either direction of a cycle. Literally making up 650,000 deer in one year, that is just too much error.

In some areas, populations are just fine. We need to try to maintain a better cycle now. In others, we are going to have to greatly reduce historic harvest. Making up more nonexistent numbers isn't going to work any better this time.

 

My area's goal is 30 dpsm, we are at 80+. I prefer seeing 40 deer a day vs. 4 a year. How's that Minnie rifle opener working out right in the peak of the rut? Wolves? You can have all ours in trade for a Viqueens division title every 20 years.

 

Sounds boring to me. Of course I'm sure you see it the other way around. That's ok. If every one liked to hunt up here, it'd ruin the area.

I saw 3 times as many deer than all the rifle hunters I talked to during the opening week. Makes me feel even better about bowhunting through it

You can keep your football, I think I only watched one game outside of the superbowl this year. I'd watch more if I lived in a state with no hunting on sundays.

 

I think this is the best line I read wasting valuable minutes from my life thru anger-fueled posts about deer populations in (arguably I'm sure!!) the best whitetail state in the country. Thanks Fitz!