Antlerless only in Wapaca?

[dan]

By Paul A. Smith of the Journal Sentinel

Updated March 26, 2016

The Wisconsin County Deer Advisory Councils last week wrapped up the first stage of their 2016 workload.

The 72 groups were tasked with making preliminary recommendations for antlerless deer quotas and regulations for this year's hunting seasons.

The loud rumbling you may have heard originated in Waupaca County, where Tuesday the CDAC members voted for antlerless-only regulations for its 2016 deer hunts.

That was not a misprint. If implemented, hunters would be allowed to shoot only antlerless deer this year in all bow and gun seasons in one of the state's top deer hunting counties.

Not a single buck allowed. Think about that for a minute. The goal, obviously, is to take more female deer and reduce the reproductive capacity of the herd.

The Waupaca County recommendation is audacious. It's unprecedented in recent times. It is already causing a lot of heartburn. And I applaud it.

"It's something we felt had to be done," said John Hedtke, Waupaca County CDAC member from Bear Creek. "We've seen the herd continue to grow. People aren't harvesting the does and this is the only tool we have that might work."

The recommendation will garner attention statewide because it was made in Waupaca County, a deer hunting mecca that produces big bucks, has a high deer population and a strong hunting tradition.

It also will shine a light on the relative lack of tools available to reduce deer populations. The Legislature and Gov. Scott Walker removed arguably the most effective measure — Earn-A-Buck — in a 2011 law change.

Last year hunters killed 11,428 deer (5,295 bucks and 6,133 antlerless) in the county, second highest in Wisconsin (Marathon County registered 12,224).

Despite relatively large harvests, the deer population has continued to increase in Waupaca County, according to Department of Natural Resources estimates.

The prehunt Waupaca County deer population was 54,383 in 2014, 57,578 in 2015 and is expected to be 64,350 this year.

"It's impossible for most people to grow trees," said Arlyn Splitt of Clintonville, chairman of the county's Wisconsin Conservation Congress delegation.

The Waupaca County CDAC has a deer population objective of "maintain." To reach that goal, last year it set an antlerless deer quota of 12,300. Hunters killed fewer than half that.

This year, 14,200 antlerless deer would have to be killed to maintain the population, according to DNR estimates.

That's why the County Deer Advisory Councils have recommended the strongest tool at its disposal: antlerless only.

If you aren't familiar with the CDAC, they are groups of citizens formed to provide local input on deer management. They resulted from a recommendation of the 2012 Deer Trustee Review initiated by Walker.

The councils include representatives from specific stakeholder groups: agricultural, forestry, hunting or sporting group, local government, transportation, tourism and the Deer Management Assistance Program.

[Dewey]

That's crazy! Can't imagine that happening

How about trapping some of those does and relocating them about 100 miles north to areas that have a much lower population?

[Bowhunting Brian]

I hunted Waupaca for years. Lots of deer there. It's funny cause my Grandma lived in that County just about her whole life and said years ago, there wasn't many deer around.

[ Post made via Android ]

[stash59]

That's one huge move. Controversial yes. Yeah it stinks if that's where you hunt bucks. But it sounds to me like a neccassary evil. If that's what the biologists say needs to be done. We need to listen to them.

I know ag areas can support more deer/sq. mi. But at the rate they mentioned it will get out of hand quick. Too high of a population will mean smaller body sizes, racks, more susceptability to disease. Like CWD! Then things will go to in a handbasket!

Dewey your idea sounds great! But where would the funds come from to do such a complex arrangement? Plus these deer totally unfamiliar with wolf predation. Would just end up helping to increase the already high wolf population. Easy targets. We're seeing what's happening with the elk in Jackson county!

[Dewey]

Dewey your idea sounds great! But where would the funds come from to do such a complex arrangement? Plus these deer totally unfamiliar with wolf predation. Would just end up helping to increase the already high wolf population. Easy targets. We're seeing what's happening with the elk in Jackson county!

Yeah I agree it could cost some money to do but I bet sportsman clubs in Waupaca county would rather raise funds and donate money to that instead of the alternate which would be no buck hunting.

Many areas in northern WI have very low herd numbers yet don't have active wolf packs. Those areas could be filled in.

I'm sure it sounds much easier than it really is.......just thinking out loud how to prevent eliminating buck hunting in Waupaca County. Anybody that hunt's up there has to be devastated to hear this especially if you pay high dollar for a lease or own your own land managed for trophy bucks.

[Bowhunting Brian]

How do you think a farm land corn fed deer would adapt in a big woods situation if transplanted?

[ Post made via Android ]

[Dewey]

How do you think a farm land corn fed deer would adapt in a big woods situation if transplanted?

[ Post made via Android ]

Deer have an amazing ability to adapt. Many areas of the big woods still have ag land and the deer would be just fine. Population recovery is very slow due to being pounded for too many years in the past. This may speed the process up some.

Again I'm no expert here just coming up with an idea I feel is a better option. Hate to see a huge doe slaughter just because everyone is upset that buck hunting has been eliminated. These surplus deer could be used for a better purpose.

[purebowhunting]

I hunt Waupaca public quite a bit, if this is implemented I would just hunt elsewhere and I'd guess that would be pretty common. I wonder if this would actually have the effect they'd expect. Letting most the bucks getting 1 year older would be fun the following year.

[ Post made via Android ]

[dan]

I have a slightly different view... If you take away buck hunting, hunters will go hunt somewhere else. Won't work. I would... I am out there hunting bucks, I don't go doe hunting... I shoot does, but you would have a hard time getting me to go on a doe only hunt. I would simply travel somewhere where I could shoot bucks, and probably shoot a buck and a doe or two...

Furthermore, I would not fully trust the biologists that high population is the end of the world, or that it means small racks and bodies... I hunted Andraes farm in Illinois where I had seen hundreds of does feeding in one field. 6 foot high browse lines, and crops getting devastated... Guess what? Andrae shot two of the states biggest whitetails out of that environment. it ain't growing the way they said it would, and hunters are starting to control it..

A better way to control it would be to give away free doe tags and allow hunters to choose whether or not on there property they want to kill more does... A decision a year or two ago to stop giving out any free tags to show value to deer had good merit in stopping people from devistating the herd in CWD zones, but in areas with high populations thats the way to gain some control...

[dan]

I hunt Waupaca public quite a bit, if this is implemented I would just hunt elsewhere and I'd guess that would be pretty common. I wonder if this would actually have the effect they'd expect. Letting most the bucks getting 1 year older would be fun the following year.

[ Post made via Android ]

EXACTLY!

[Bowhunting Brian]

A better way to control it would be to give away free doe tags and allow hunters to choose whether or not on there property they want to kill more does... A decision a year or two ago to stop giving out any free tags to show value to deer had good merit in stopping people from devistating the herd in CWD zones, but in areas with high populations thats the way to gain some control...

I hunted up there while the earn a buck doe slaughter went on. It was all private land and the group I was in and all the surrounding neighbors didn't like the rule, so we all shot fawns to earn our bucks. We let the older does walk and only shot one antler less deer even though we could have shot 6. So many people else where complained they saw no deer after the first year of earn a buck. We always saw deer because of the way we did it. We took it into our own hands while others slaughtered the deer and then blamed the dnr for giving out too many tags. There are already some real dandy bucks up there because lots of people let the little ones walk. There isn't a need to give the bucks a year off. It's already a great place to buck hunt.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Hawthorne]

They will have bucks walking around with big busted racks in 2017 because they will be fighting for the lower doe population.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Lockdown]

What about an early doe season? I realize you wouldnt want it TOO early for the sake of the fawns.

Or implement Earn-A-Buck again. Rather than no buck tag at all, require doe registry to get your buck tag.

I know the hard core guys will probably head to a different county, but there are lots of weekend warriors who wouldn't want to travel. They'd be pretty serious about earning that tag.

[ Post made via iPhone ]

[purebowhunting]

I think earn a buck would be the best solution, but even earn a buck people abuse public to kill does and the huge populations on private remains. I would say reducing the dollars given for crop damage would be a solution, once farmers start losing money either they'll start killing or they'll open properties to hunting.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Swampbuck]

Bring them does down here... I need them bad

[ Post made via Android ]