Wisconsin bill would eliminate doe harvest in part of the state

[seeth07]

Regarding your Bayfield County comment, and this would apply to any: it could also be that they just like to shoot does, and no matter how low the population gets they still aren’t going to recommend that away for themselves. See also: Montana.

Does THEY matter at all to YOU who lives (not sure if you hunt where you live) 250 miles away?

 

[Treeshark]

Yes it does matter. I own land all over northern Wisconsin, same as everyone else.

 

[seeth07]

Yes it does matter. I own land all over northern Wisconsin, same as everyone else.

Do you attend the county meetings where you own the land? Do you read the meeting minutes and also provide comments to be read at the meetings?

 

[get-n-birdy]

Wildlife is politics. Been that way as long as humans have felt the hunger pains of empty bellies and needed to feed themselves. The idea that it isn't political, is, in and of itself, delusional. All for trying to manage off of the best interest of wildlife and the resources alone. But at best, most agencies are a day late and a dollar short. Controlling doe harvest in states with WSI's is like betting on futures. There's no telling what good ole ma nature will do. Been piss pounding does for far to long in Bobby Zimmerman's north country. Most wildlife is not managed for the best interest of wildlife or habitat long term. There is always a socioeconomical factor to it, always. Money, money, money. It always boils down to follow the money trail. Who is making what off what? Who is loosing what, because of whom or what and how much?

As the habitat pie gets smaller and more broken up, there are inevitability more opinions on whose ox is being feed or gourd. Put in a rabid, highly emotional, and fairly new comer on the scene, that basically wants nothing touched when it comes to habitat issues, and it's a convoluted, hard to navigate arena, with a lot of uncertainties. There's a new want of, lots of apex pretty predators on the ground with no non lethal take measures ever. Except for in defense of human life and even then it is a stretch for the ideology that is being worshiped. Hunters want plentiful game and everything managed around that. Broad brush strokes, but that's life in a nutshell.

There is no more, not that there ever really was, non political wildlife management. It has been run basically by hunters for a while and we had a nice run. Now it has more seats at a ever shrinking table, that have no care or concern for anyone else who has been sitting at the table for years. There's no respect, thought or care what the history of wildlife management has been. The table is getting turned and flipped. The anti-everything'er is highly effective at PR campaigns, educated, funded, well versed in the litigation and judicial process, and doesn't give two ch!ts about hunting or the North American Conservation Model. If hunting disappeared from the planet today, they'd have a parade.

Yes, having politicians and politics making wildlife management decisions on and in the political stage is problematic. No matter if you agree with them or not. That is the reality of it though, and it isn't going away. In all probability, that herd of horses has already run out the barn and is never going back in.

 

[Treeshark]

Do you attend the county meetings where you own the land? Do you read the meeting minutes and also provide comments to be read at the meetings?

Yes. I go to every meeting in every county north of highway 29.

Cmon now… I think we may have jumped the shark, appreciate the discussion.

 

[Bigjay73]

Who's to say politics wasn't already in it, prior to this decision. Insurance companies sure do hate deer, almost as much as they love politicians.

Can't argue that, politics finds its way into everything

 

[seeth07]

Yes. I go to every meeting in every county north of highway 29.

Cmon now… I think we may have jumped the shark, appreciate the discussion.

Perfect, pulling the "public land owner" card and want to be a smartass about it. Love it because its easy to make my point here then.

You own land in all 50 states then. You can't possibly have enough time in your day to be engaged and fight for your beliefs and desires everywhere you own land. So what and where is important to you? Do you regularly create an annual deer camp in Taylor County hunting the Chequamegon? Do you at least engage yourself in the Taylor county discussions?

I will give you the respect I'm sure you deserve once you get involved and investigate the process for yourself rather than how you think or how you've been told the process works. Until then, supporting this bullshit legislation created makes you no different than the lame hunters who go "there are no deer because the wolves ate them all"

 

[seeth07]

Me on this topic:



I think I finally understand and can relate to all the Montana folks in that "other deer thread"

 

[ALFhunts]

I made an account just

No doe harvest up north for a few years is a great thing! It’s about damn time.

(WDNR supporter).

Can't argue that, politics finds its way into everything

Politics are 100% heavily involved in the state of Wisconsin’s natural resources. The republicans play WI residents like fiddles acting “for sportsman” for voter support to get elected and then make decisions that are detrimental af to conservation - google Frederick Prehn’s texts and the whole fiasco with him squatting on the NRB, how the R senate wouldn’t confirm a beyond qualified candidate that was appointed to his chair, Sandra Dee Nass which was the only way to get him removed without him doing it willingly or forced removal from the Supreme Court (which was tired and they ruled in his favor bc he legally was doing nothing wrong per our legislation)… a gross over reach of power

That happened in other areas of our state agencies and not just the NRB. People squatting with expired terms and people serving without being confirmed all somehow perfectly legal and do you want to know why they stopped confirming Evers appointees several months prior to the election? Because if Evers had lost the last election then the new R governor could dismiss all unconfirmed appointees and replace them with his choosing

All about power and control - so no these republicans don’t give a F about the deer herd. Angie Sapik’s brother Jamie Vee wants hunting regs changed and put on his FB what he’d changed them suddenly Angie was in hunting groups asking about those things and hosting listening sessions with Quinn Romaine - it’s lobbying for voter support while pandering to what her brother wants

This whole thing is a $*)Q!#@$ joke. They’re listening session hearing from bar stool biologists and have had zero input from actual ones, clearly, or this outlandish proposition wouldn’t have been made. Thankfully so far nothing she’s supported has actually even made it far enough to get a bill number to start the process to become a law and I doubt this one will either

 

[ALFhunts]

Perfect, pulling the "public land owner" card and want to be a smartass about it. Love it because its easy to make my point here then.

You own land in all 50 states then. You can't possibly have enough time in your day to be engaged and fight for your beliefs and desires everywhere you own land. So what and where is important to you? Do you regularly create an annual deer camp in Taylor County hunting the Chequamegon? Do you at least engage yourself in the Taylor county discussions?

I will give you the respect I'm sure you deserve once you get involved and investigate the process for yourself rather than how you think or how you've been told the process works. Until then, supporting this bullshit legislation created makes you no different than the lame hunters who go "there are no deer because the wolves ate them all"

NOBODY GETS INVOLVED OR PAYS ATTENTION SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS

 

[CowboyLeroy]

It's that see dubber dee what done it

 

[tzone]

I don't think axing the antlerless permits was the "legislation" the folks had in mind. lol Reducing the wolves and bears is what they're looking for.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't think axing the antlerless permits was the "legislation" the folks had in mind. lol Reducing the wolves and bears is what they're looking for.

WI can't do much on the wolf front. Agency could increase bear harvest if that's a problem.

 

[thusby]

I hunted Burnett and Douglas pretty hard over a 10 year span. Numbers suck but the real grinders could always drop a decent buck. We definitely shouldn’t legislate purely for hunter satisfaction. 90% of the guys that can’t kill a deer up there are slow learning, mouth breathers anyhow.

 

[tzone]

WI can't do much on the wolf front. Agency could increase bear harvest if that's a problem.

They could. but they won't.

 

[tzone]

I hunted Burnett and Douglas pretty hard over a 10 year span. Numbers suck but the real grinders could always drop a decent buck. We definitely shouldn’t legislate purely for hunter satisfaction. 90% of the guys that can’t kill a deer up there are slow learning, mouth breathers anyhow.

Hahaha.

According to my time spent bowhunting, the season for rifle opens about the end of October. lol

We get a few nice bucks our of Douglas/Burnett each season but sometimes we need to work harder than others.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Just going to feed more wolves. Stop trying to over-manage the deer herd when you can't manage predators.
Sad that our deer hunting has become so political now. It's not even fun anymore.

Just a taste of what is coming nationwide. You're just the "lucky" suckers that they started with.