WI boys united?

[Octang]

Interesting post. I like Walker but I don't like most of the changes made to hunting lately. Though one of my outdoorsman friends couldn't be happier... I think a number of good ol boys want the dnr completely abolished so they can essentially poach anything and everything. I'm a lifelong republican but have been getting really frustrated lately.

[dan]

Supposedly the CDAC meetings were going to be the place for us to have input. Unfortunately CDAC has become yet another instance of ignoring hunters and landowners. The other interests on the CDAC always seem to have more say than the hunting and landowner interest.

YEP... I was nominated for CDAC by a State biologist, then the position was given to someone with less knowledge whom agreed with whatever they want him to agree with. They hand pick guys to be on those boards that they feel they can manipulate.

[dan]

The DNR's hands are tied in state's legislation process. They are there to enforce the laws, not create them. Scott Walker simply abandoned WI hunters. Not happy with that guy.

Your a little off in my opinion... Walker is trying to save money, and make hunters happy. If he ain't hearing from you and is only hearing from the guys in the WDNR he likely thinks he ios doing a great thing by creating opportunity and simplifying the process. Without him we would still be in a CWD war zone.

[dan]

The DNR's hands are tied in state's legislation process. They are there to enforce the laws, not create them. Scott Walker simply abandoned WI hunters. Not happy with that guy.

Yep. The dnr has no power anymore thanks to walker.

Politicians aren’t biologists. Yet only one makes all the rules for the other to follow.

X2

Did you guys like it better when the plan was to kill every deer in the state with unlimited tags? if you don't like the direction you need to contact the man in charge or really, you shouldn't complain. You can make a difference. But if the Biologists that are being controlled by there bosses are making suggestions based on what they are told to do by there bosses who are not biologists, Walker is taking THERE advice, that's what the Gov. does, he listens to the advice of the biologists, the "experts" in the DNR and the people who write in and makes a decision. He needs to hear more from the last one, THE PEOPLE.

[dan]

The DNR's hands are tied in state's legislation process. They are there to enforce the laws, not create them. Scott Walker simply abandoned WI hunters. Not happy with that guy.

Yep. The dnr has no power anymore thanks to walker.

Politicians aren’t biologists. Yet only one makes all the rules for the other to follow.

No power cause of walker? You realize Walker is the one whom actually hired actual Biologists for every county in the state? Our last Gov. (A Democrat) Had his neighbor in one top position, a lawyer of his was given another position, and he felt he did not need Biologists... Walker hired them to give him advice. Not a lawyer, and a neighbor who don't know crap or even hunt. I remember when the Lawyer threatened to fire anybody in the DNR that had ideas that went against what he said. I know buried in this forum is a post and a letter I posted that the lawyer sent out stating that they were going to fire anybody whom did not agree with his plan to eradicate the deer herd. A lady biologist was hired by the state to do a study on CWD dispersal, they wanted to prove they needed to lessen the herd. When the results came back and were not what any of them expected ( it showed that CWD spread faster with a smaller herd do to larger buck home ranges in smaller herds) The lawyer fired her setting a precedence of how they will handle anybody who goes against killing all the deer... You should thank God that Walker came in and fixed all that. If the Dem's were still in office we would not even have a deer heard. Yea, I would like to see the head of the WDNR be a voted position by the people, but Walker is trying to do whats right. The blame don't fall on him, it falls on all the people whom complain but never send him a letter or email.

[dan]

Guys, the only thing Walker cares about is making Walker look good to lobbyists and scum bags like the Koch brothers.
Yes, my views might be s little skewed cause I’m a democrat, I’m union, and I’m married to a public school teacher.
But, Walker has screwed everybody except his rich supporters who donate to his campaign funds.
The dnr needs to be in charge of the dnr. Hunters and the dnr should be the ones proposing regulations for hunting. If we as hunters don’t stand together and oppose this administration we can kiss our rights as hunter, outdoorsman, and Wisconsinites goodbye.

I see things a little different... I try not to judge based on hearsay, or biased news articles, but based on what I see. A company I work for is a good example. When Democrats were in charge they gave this company a 1/2 million dollars to create jobs. Only stipulation was that the company in return donate a 1/4 million to Doyles campaign. Right after receiving the money the company laid off over 500 employees and moved its work to Mexico and Canada to avoid the high Democrat taxes of Wisconsin.

When Walker got in office, he lowered taxes for this company to get work done here. The Dem's had a hay-day with that saying "lower taxes for the rich" However, the work done in Mexico and Canada was brought back to Wisconsin.

WHICH ONE OF THESE GUYS WAS BUYING VOTES Or buying campaign money with the peoples tax money?



Unfortunately this is not a made up example. This is fact that I watched unfold personally. Its not what you would believe reading the paper or watching the news, but its the truth.

[Net Guy]

The DNR's hands are tied in state's legislation process. They are there to enforce the laws, not create them. Scott Walker simply abandoned WI hunters. Not happy with that guy.

Yep. The dnr has no power anymore thanks to walker.

Politicians aren’t biologists. Yet only one makes all the rules for the other to follow.

X2

Did you guys like it better when the plan was to kill every deer in the state with unlimited tags? if you don't like the direction you need to contact the man in charge or really, you shouldn't complain. You can make a difference. But if the Biologists that are being controlled by there bosses are making suggestions based on what they are told to do by there bosses who are not biologists, Walker is taking THERE advice, that's what the Gov. does, he listens to the advice of the biologists, the "experts" in the DNR and the people who write in and makes a decision. He needs to hear more from the last one, THE PEOPLE.

I don't think we need to make it a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an overall hunting and resource issue. You're right, Dan, it was not better with the prior regime with killing every deer in the state and issuing unlimited tags. I agree with your views on CWD and herd size and the old regime really set us back many many years with their system. Plus, all these doe seasons in the last season are rediculous as well. I remember when the old regime had the 4-day doe hunt during the rut - what a joke! However, there are many things this regime has done to negatively impact hunting in my opinion as well.

I can live with it, but I don't like the removal of the backtags. I felt backtags kept more of the borderline unethical hunters honest. Removing the need to register at a station has done a lot of harm too. Just ask all the bars around the state how that has negatively impacted them economically. Plus, I loved to go there and see all the deer. Again, this kept more of the borderline unethical hunters honest.

As for the new tagging requirements that snuck into the state budget this year. That was a big mistake if you ask me. I attend as many meetings and hearings as I can so my voice can be heard, but Walker didn't allow the PEOPLE or the DNR a voice on this one. What's a guy supposed to do when that gets snuck into a budget at the last second without anyone knowing? Now a system has been created that those borderline unethical hunters can easily cheat the system. Consequently, that will negatively impact all of us.

With this regime's historic staff reduction of the DNR and budgetary cuts (some needed), I can't say we are set up for long-term success. The children are the future, and I fear the way the system is setup now, I'm not so sure what that future will hold. The resources aren't there to educate people as well as years past with the removal of the DNR information center at State Fair, the registration and tagging system helps the borderline unethical hunters, and the state can't purchase and/or manage public lands as well as in the past either. Lastly, the PEOPLE's voice is getting harder and harder to be heard, that scares me.

[Whitetailaddict]

Have the meeting dates for public hearings been released? I agree with Dan and others that people need to attend these meetings and voice their concerns.

[headgear]

I feel your pain guys, our herd in Northern MN crashed around 2008 and is now just recovering but still a long ways to go. Winters took their toll but it didn't have to hurt as bad as it did because the DNR was cashing in on tag sales to tune of millions of $$$, clearly clouding their judgement when it came to the population. Hopefully lesson learned, I myself set strict rules up to where and where not I will shoot an extra doe but it doesn't help when everyone else is shooting them. Sounds like you guys have extra problems with all the extra hunts. For sure time to band together and limit the doe slaughter and get the herd numbers back up.

Let the political stuff go, everyone want to see and shoot more deer, best way to do that is working together instead of arguing stuff that doesn't matter when it comes to deer.

[tgreeno]

I just sent my email to Gov. Walker

[Kraftd]

We also can't assume that our opinions as hunters are the only ones that matter to deer herd management.

Farmers generally want deer numbers down in many areas, insurance companies generally want deer numbers down, in some areas high deer numbers impact other habitat restoration goals due to browsing so biologists want deer numbers down, lower deer numbers can mitigate starvation ad bad winter issues, we still don't understand nearly enough about CWD to know some things for sure so that needs some thought. I'm not saying at all that I'm ok with low deer numbers and the unlimited seasons, just pointing these things out.

Point is, make your voices heard, as suggested, but look at the bigger picture too. Just about everything is political and unfortunately most of the groups I listed above have more political clout than hunters. That's one reason, to me anyways, why it is important for us to stay unified. Us being ethical fair chase hunters and also public land users. Our politics, weapons of choice, methods, etc. may differ, but we're a tiny group nationally, and if we fracture, or let our sport go the way of the european pay to play model, we're doomed.

[dan]

The DNR's hands are tied in state's legislation process. They are there to enforce the laws, not create them. Scott Walker simply abandoned WI hunters. Not happy with that guy.

Yep. The dnr has no power anymore thanks to walker.

Politicians aren’t biologists. Yet only one makes all the rules for the other to follow.

X2

Did you guys like it better when the plan was to kill every deer in the state with unlimited tags? if you don't like the direction you need to contact the man in charge or really, you shouldn't complain. You can make a difference. But if the Biologists that are being controlled by there bosses are making suggestions based on what they are told to do by there bosses who are not biologists, Walker is taking THERE advice, that's what the Gov. does, he listens to the advice of the biologists, the "experts" in the DNR and the people who write in and makes a decision. He needs to hear more from the last one, THE PEOPLE.

I don't think we need to make it a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an overall hunting and resource issue. You're right, Dan, it was not better with the prior regime with killing every deer in the state and issuing unlimited tags. I agree with your views on CWD and herd size and the old regime really set us back many many years with their system. Plus, all these doe seasons in the last season are rediculous as well. I remember when the old regime had the 4-day doe hunt during the rut - what a joke! However, there are many things this regime has done to negatively impact hunting in my opinion as well.

I can live with it, but I don't like the removal of the backtags. I felt backtags kept more of the borderline unethical hunters honest. Removing the need to register at a station has done a lot of harm too. Just ask all the bars around the state how that has negatively impacted them economically. Plus, I loved to go there and see all the deer. Again, this kept more of the borderline unethical hunters honest.

As for the new tagging requirements that snuck into the state budget this year. That was a big mistake if you ask me. I attend as many meetings and hearings as I can so my voice can be heard, but Walker didn't allow the PEOPLE or the DNR a voice on this one. What's a guy supposed to do when that gets snuck into a budget at the last second without anyone knowing? Now a system has been created that those borderline unethical hunters can easily cheat the system. Consequently, that will negatively impact all of us.

With this regime's historic staff reduction of the DNR and budgetary cuts (some needed), I can't say we are set up for long-term success. The children are the future, and I fear the way the system is setup now, I'm not so sure what that future will hold. The resources aren't there to educate people as well as years past with the removal of the DNR information center at State Fair, the registration and tagging system helps the borderline unethical hunters, and the state can't purchase and/or manage public lands as well as in the past either. Lastly, the PEOPLE's voice is getting harder and harder to be heard, that scares me.

They are listening now better than they were, its just that not enough people are voicing there opinions. A big part of it is to save money, I get that. We should be doing what we can to fix the budget. I agree on the tagging system, and the way to get that changed is to let Walkers office know we would be willing to pay the extra dollar or two to have actual tags that need to be punched before a deer is moved brought back. They are listening, we are not being loud enough.

[dan]

We also can't assume that our opinions as hunters are the only ones that matter to deer herd management.

Farmers generally want deer numbers down in many areas, insurance companies generally want deer numbers down, in some areas high deer numbers impact other habitat restoration goals due to browsing so biologists want deer numbers down, lower deer numbers can mitigate starvation ad bad winter issues, we still don't understand nearly enough about CWD to know some things for sure so that needs some thought. I'm not saying at all that I'm ok with low deer numbers and the unlimited seasons, just pointing these things out.

Point is, make your voices heard, as suggested, but look at the bigger picture too. Just about everything is political and unfortunately most of the groups I listed above have more political clout than hunters. That's one reason, to me anyways, why it is important for us to stay unified. Us being ethical fair chase hunters and also public land users. Our politics, weapons of choice, methods, etc. may differ, but we're a tiny group nationally, and if we fracture, or let our sport go the way of the european pay to play model, we're doomed.

I agree about the in-fighting, its funny to see gun hunters turn on bow hunters and think its ok to take away a part of our heritage, but they sure wouldn't be willing to loose 1/2 there gun season to a bow hunt for does only.

No matter where you stand on deer numbers, you have got to see that a doe season that kills 50% bucks and eliminates opportunity for bow hunters is just plain wrong. If they gave more doe tags out hunters could regulate the herd themselves. And if they actually managed the deer herd instead of the deer numbers we could grow some of the biggest bucks in the country and become the go to place driving up revenue for every one involved including the farmers. Just look at Buffalo county.

[Kraftd]

We also can't assume that our opinions as hunters are the only ones that matter to deer herd management.

Farmers generally want deer numbers down in many areas, insurance companies generally want deer numbers down, in some areas high deer numbers impact other habitat restoration goals due to browsing so biologists want deer numbers down, lower deer numbers can mitigate starvation ad bad winter issues, we still don't understand nearly enough about CWD to know some things for sure so that needs some thought. I'm not saying at all that I'm ok with low deer numbers and the unlimited seasons, just pointing these things out.

Point is, make your voices heard, as suggested, but look at the bigger picture too. Just about everything is political and unfortunately most of the groups I listed above have more political clout than hunters. That's one reason, to me anyways, why it is important for us to stay unified. Us being ethical fair chase hunters and also public land users. Our politics, weapons of choice, methods, etc. may differ, but we're a tiny group nationally, and if we fracture, or let our sport go the way of the european pay to play model, we're doomed.

I agree about the in-fighting, its funny to see gun hunters turn on bow hunters and think its ok to take away a part of our heritage, but they sure wouldn't be willing to loose 1/2 there gun season to a bow hunt for does only.

No matter where you stand on deer numbers, you have got to see that a doe season that kills 50% bucks and eliminates opportunity for bow hunters is just plain wrong. If they gave more doe tags out hunters could regulate the herd themselves. And if they actually managed the deer herd instead of the deer numbers we could grow some of the biggest bucks in the country and become the go to place driving up revenue for every one involved including the farmers. Just look at Buffalo county.

Completely agree on the late doe seasons. Make no real sense from a deer herd management perspective if hunting is the primary goal. This is what leads me to believe that politically, our voice in deer management may never be the one most listened to, even if the loudest. This goes for both sides of the aisle.

I have doe tags left I can chase with a bow in the far southern part of the state, but just can't convince myself I feel good about doing it.

[Hatchetman]

We also can't assume that our opinions as hunters are the only ones that matter to deer herd management.

Farmers generally want deer numbers down in many areas, insurance companies generally want deer numbers down, in some areas high deer numbers impact other habitat restoration goals due to browsing so biologists want deer numbers down, lower deer numbers can mitigate starvation ad bad winter issues, we still don't understand nearly enough about CWD to know some things for sure so that needs some thought. I'm not saying at all that I'm ok with low deer numbers and the unlimited seasons, just pointing these things out.

Point is, make your voices heard, as suggested, but look at the bigger picture too. Just about everything is political and unfortunately most of the groups I listed above have more political clout than hunters. That's one reason, to me anyways, why it is important for us to stay unified. Us being ethical fair chase hunters and also public land users. Our politics, weapons of choice, methods, etc. may differ, but we're a tiny group nationally, and if we fracture, or let our sport go the way of the european pay to play model, we're doomed.

I agree about the in-fighting, its funny to see gun hunters turn on bow hunters and think its ok to take away a part of our heritage, but they sure wouldn't be willing to loose 1/2 there gun season to a bow hunt for does only.

No matter where you stand on deer numbers, you have got to see that a doe season that kills 50% bucks and eliminates opportunity for bow hunters is just plain wrong. If they gave more doe tags out hunters could regulate the herd themselves. And if they actually managed the deer herd instead of the deer numbers we could grow some of the biggest bucks in the country and become the go to place driving up revenue for every one involved including the farmers. Just look at Buffalo county.

Explain your logic here?