Moultrie Mobile
No doe killing affect
Wisconsin
Contributors to this thread:
razorhead 12-May-15
Novemberforever 12-May-15
Novemberforever 12-May-15
razorhead 12-May-15
happygolucky 12-May-15
Cheesehead Mike 12-May-15
Drop Tine 12-May-15
happygolucky 12-May-15
Drop Tine 12-May-15
razorhead 12-May-15
JackPine Acres 12-May-15
Bow Crazy 12-May-15
Cheesehead Mike 12-May-15
GoJakesGo 12-May-15
GoJakesGo 12-May-15
GoJakesGo 12-May-15
sawtooth 12-May-15
10orbetter 12-May-15
Antler Whore 13-May-15
RutNut@work 13-May-15
From: razorhead
12-May-15
Interesting conversation with a wildlife biologist, who bowhunts and traps, working now in private sector. lots of experience ,,,,,,,,, his opinion.........

For the NE corner of the state, Forest and Florence Co.... not killing does, during the archery season will have no overall effect on the herd as a whole.

He would not allow it for gun season, but for archery it would have little effect........

For the last 5 years, the old DMU unit of 39, now Forest Co, there has been no doe tags at all, and it has had no effect, the herd continues to struggle......

The problem is the habitat. This area has so much Federal land, that is not managed for the benefit of deer,,,,,,, only thru serious habitat improvement will the herd really rebound.....

Tough winter comes and so much predation that always exists, and your back to square one.......

just another perspective, thought was interesting

12-May-15
In 2013 Forest county antlerless harvest was 838, 279 taken with archery. It doesn't matter what weapon takes the deer. 838 antlerless=at least 400 bred doe=800 deer vertical in 4 weeks plus 438=1238 more deer in forest county in 4 weeks. Yes, logging is the long term key. Good luck with that but trigger/tag restraint is a short term fix.

12-May-15
Well zero antlerless tags were issued last year and 838 were legally taken via military,disabled and "youth". I doubt the DNR will do anything to stop this and make zero mean zero.

From: razorhead
12-May-15
dave his opinion was that for archers they would not kill enough does to make a difference

its just another opinion, that's all. I know we are not going to kill any does, and I hope it helps, I was just saying, it as another perspective, another point of view from a wildlife scientist, who has no self interest in the game.......

November - I wish reproduction did occur like your numbers indicate, by those equations in a perfect world we would have a ton of deer up here.....

For the record, I believe No does should be killed by anyone,,,,,,

Last year during the ML season, when the weather broke, and the crowds were gone, I hunted eastern Forest Co, on the log jobs and in a week I counted 62 deer,,,,,,,, Now figure 1/4 were the same deer, it was nice to see, deer.......

I did not see one buck, but it was nice to see the does and fawns,,,,,,, also this last winter, was mild, so we will see,,,,,,

From: happygolucky
12-May-15
I totally agree with Ronny and November here. I have a hard time believing that letting does live does not positively impact the herd. How can it not? Every doe killed is propagated due to the lack of fawns going forward for her and her possibly fawns. A dead doe is not a 1..1 correlation.

This much is for sure, when a doe is killed, it has a 0% chance of making the herd bigger. Like releasing a fish, it might still die but in the livewell it has a 0% chance of spawning again.

Look at the statics here. Predation is not decreasing and will be worse until there is another wolf hunt with a respectable quota. The public habitat is not improving. The winters cannot be controlled. What is left that we can control? Letting the does live so they can breed.

12-May-15
I agree that ZERO does should be shot in the majority of northern Wisconsin.

It's amazing how not long ago does were treated like vermin that needed to be exterminated and now we're talking about not shooting any.

I put that mostly on the DNR and their short sited management practices of continually writing checks that their asses can't cash. But it's also partly on the hunters who won't excercise restraint or do what's best for the herd. It's a shame the way the resource has been managed into oblivion...

From: Drop Tine
12-May-15
I have let does walk for a number of years to build the population in my area only to find them laying on the side of the road rotting.

You can't farm deer without a fence. Also without proper habitat you can't increase the herd. Mother Nature is funny that way. It's just the way it is.

From: happygolucky
12-May-15
"You can't farm deer without a fence. Also without proper habitat you can't increase the herd. Mother Nature is funny that way. It's just the way it is. "

DT, are you saying that with a couple of mild winters in a row and restraint on killing does, the herd will not increase because the habitat was not improved?

From: Drop Tine
12-May-15
Populations would increase some but it would not be sustainable. There are a lot more factors that go into population numbers in the north than just winter.

With increased populations comes increased predator populations, disease, and movement to find food and sanctuary. I'm seeing it on the roads now. Doe's looking for fawning areas. Yearlings getting kicked out and the roads are littered with rotting carcasses.

Without proper habitat and food you can't increase a long term Population growth and sustain it.

From: razorhead
12-May-15
DT - you said it better than I put it. The private biologist I was talking too said just that, " its habitat stupid".........

12-May-15
I have been shocked by the number of dead deer on I-94 from Waukesha up to the Dells area. These are freshly hit deer vs ones that are uncovered once the snow melts.

Not sure what it means but it sure seems like a lot more deer hit this spring than in past years.

From: Bow Crazy
12-May-15
On our drives this weekend, from Madison area to Tomah area, both my son and I commented on the number of deer kills. I believe it's younger deer, bucks, moving on to new territories. I think I read somewhere how this time of year the road deer kill is high. Second to the rut. BC

12-May-15
In the parts of Bayfield County that I hunt there is a lot of logging going on and there is plenty of habitat but the deer have practially vanished. Yes, a couple bad winters killed a lot of them and predators killed their share. But we have had bad winters in the past and there has always been (some) predators.

The problem is that the DNR apparently does not factor in winter-kill or predator kill when calculating how many antlerless tags to issue and have reduce the herd to the point where it will take a long time to rebound if it ever does...

From: GoJakesGo
12-May-15
Grabbed 3 free car killed deer last year for myself and passed on others. 2 had to be out down because of a busted leg and the 3rd had a head injury. You can always pass on the mangled ones. They sure do taste good and I didn't have to hurt the struggling northern herd. Too many are left in the ditch to rot.

The smartest deer use to live far back in the woods. With predator numbers the smart deer now live near humans. Some just can't judge vehicle speed well.

From: GoJakesGo
12-May-15
Grabbed 3 free car killed deer last year for myself and passed on others. 2 had to be out down because of a busted leg and the 3rd had a head injury. You can always pass on the mangled ones. They sure do taste good and I didn't have to hurt the struggling northern herd. Too many are left in the ditch to rot.

The smartest deer use to live far back in the woods. With predator numbers the smart deer now live near humans. Some just can't judge vehicle speed well.

From: GoJakesGo
12-May-15
Grabbed 3 free car killed deer last year for myself and passed on others. 2 had to be out down because of a busted leg and the 3rd had a head injury. You can always pass on the mangled ones. They sure do taste good and I didn't have to hurt the struggling northern herd. Too many are left in the ditch to rot.

The smartest deer use to live far back in the woods. With predator numbers the smart deer now live near humans. Some just can't judge vehicle speed well.

From: sawtooth
12-May-15
Any doe you kill contributes to the problem. No different than removing a breeding cow from the cattle herd. Anyone who argues with that has their head where the sun does not shine.

From: 10orbetter
12-May-15
Let's not forget, that Forest County has lost a lot of timber company land to sale and development, i.e. Bog Brook, Connors Woods, St. Johns Lake, Lily Lakeā€¦ Those areas used to give hunters much more opportunity. Add to it predators, poor Federal Land Management, tough winters, over harvest of does, and you have the perfect cocktail for disaster. When I hunted near Wabeno, it was nothing to see 12 to 15 antlerless in a day. Last time I hunted grouse in the area, I didn't see a deer the entire weekend.

From: Antler Whore
13-May-15
CClose hunting in all counties ties that are decimated...let the herd rebound..short term

long term..start cutting g in the national forests..the price of wood is super high.. great revenue producer and reinvest 20% back into the properties I. Planting and habitat improvements

From: RutNut@work
13-May-15
"The problem is that the DNR apparently does not factor in winter-kill or predator kill when calculating how many antlerless tags to issue"

Correct Mike. But it's not that they don't know they should be figuring it in. If they did figure it in, they would have had no choice but to reduce tags. Which would reduce revenue, which is all they really care about. They milked the northern deer herd for all they could. Now they are feeling the effects of "overdrawing."

  • Sitka Gear