Keep sending those DNR people e-mails . every month .
If you're speaking of parts of the north where hunters, predators and winters have hit hard, the answer is low to no antlerless hunting, increased predator tags, mild winters and habitat improvement.
Farm country, there are no shortage of whitetails anywhere I've traveled (south, central and east).
If you seem to keep seeing the same old doe and a fawn or two, she might be a matriarchal doe that won't let another family group on your property, she would need to be shot to help your population out in the near future.
If you need to kill an antlerless deer and you think your population is too low, try to pick out the buck fawns. They will be miles away from your property by next fall and will have no effect on your local herd....dead or alive.
If your goal is to increase your local herd, it would probably be best to either not hunt your property at all or shoot the first legal deer that comes by and stay off your property the rest of the season so the deer that do come on your property from other pressure feel safe there. Shooting a small/young buck compared to letting them walk and waiting for a big/mature buck will make no difference on your local herd. But you hunting that same property, in search of that big/mature buck, will add pressure and presence to you property, in turn forcing some deer out and not allowing newer deer to feel safe on your property. Saving one buck over another buck will have zero effect on your local herd, adult does are the only ones that will give you more deer and they will find a buck somewhere to get that process started. Bucks don't make more deer, they will travel miles and miles to get the process started and go back to where ever they came from, while your does will stay put to complete the process.
Sorry for going so long, I'm sure a lot on here will disagree, it is just looking at things a different way.
BTW, buying tags and burning them could do more harm than good in the long run, since the success rates will be used in future issuances of tags. Now there are 9 for sure that will be unsuccessful, so if they look at the same overall quota in the future the success rate will be lower and the number of permits will be increased. I know 9 doesn't make a difference out of 1,000 permits, but what if 25% or more of those that purchased permits did the same thing? It could end up having a negative affect in the future. There are areas in Lincoln County that can't handle any antlerless harvest and areas that could use a significant antlerless harvest.
Again, sorry for the length of the post.
Taking bucks does not affect the DPSM ratio nearly what taking does will. The DNR gets that and that is why there are no antlerless tags up north and even in the UP, there are only 3 DMUs where antlerless deer can be taken. When EAB went bye-bye, the populations in the CWD areas increased, at least where I hunted in Columbia County. Too many people bought into the slaughter the DNR initiated circa 2000 and we are still paying for that today in some areas.
Good post but your supporting a DNR that doesn't have a clue. Hunting or fishing everyone needs to be fired and start over As Trump says, most govt workers are Lemmings more concerned about the job security and benefits then doing what right.
That does not help the population unless you let all the deer you see walk. Letting the first deer walk only to shoot the sixth deer accomplishes nothing. Only unfilled tags have a hope of altering the population.
Letting the does walk as Happy suggests is the most logical answer. Stop shooting does until populations rebound.
The DNR manages the deer and really no matter what we do is going to change the numbers. Maybe in a small area but say if no one shots any does in a 1000 acre parcel and the guys all around them shoot every doe the does are going to migrate off the 1000 acres and start inhabiting the surounding areas.
I'm not supporting the DNR, I just know how they are required, by politicians, to manage the game of the State. As much as people think, the DNR really doesn't have a whole lot of say on things. The are told what the end goal has to be and are required to use the tools given to them, by those requiring said goal, to reach that goal. For deer the goal isn't a per "40" goal or a "square mile" goal or a private/public goal or even a County goal.....it is a Statewide goal. A Statewide goal working County by County with or without the support from hunters. Their hands are tied more than the hunter's are.
Can someone please tell me the definition of "enough" in Ashland and Waupaca counties?
Too many people believe normal is what we had in the late 90's and will accept nothing but a return to those days.
I have a friend who sees 10-20 deer per sit and does nothing but complain about how the DNR screwed up hunting......he used to see 30-50!!!!
I know people who throw out a corn pile 2 weeks before the season, sit it for about 10 hours......and head for home on Monday morning wailing about that damn DNR when they don't see anything.
My point?
You can't do a darn thing about the population on either a micro or macro level. Recalibrate your expectations.. Hunt often and hard. Take a kid or a non-hunting friend under your wing. Eat more venison.
A friend of mine last week told me the field he was hunting a few counties south of here had 50 deer on it when he was hunting it this fall. "How many could you have shot" I asked. You see, around here we can see the same acreage as that field. I am sure there aren't 50 deer in the same size area here but a lot of times there are deer hunters never see.
For sure the herd is down a lot here, the lack of sign shows it but it is better than it was the last two years. In the later '70s it was lot like it is now and it built after that for a long time. With the logging going on now I am seeking healthier looking deer. With some mild winters and no doe tags a couple years and it will be fine here.
+1 on that sawtooth. I said the same thing in the Personal Buck thread.
Most of the hunters who complain the loudest about deer hunting in the north woods.......are simply not good hunters! They are mostly weekend wonder boys sitting on their bait piles within 200 yards of the road. Or sitting on the same stump on the same over mature 80 acres they've sat on for 40 years. Quite a few road hunters complain a lot too, in my experience.
I don't want to derail your thread. I simply agreed with sawtooth. But, for the record, since you are calling me on it, while not in the exact words, but in the same meaning, here is what I said in that thread in 2 different quotes:
"Why not let the big ones walk to help the herd structure and shoot the little ones because they taste better?"
"If people really were worried about the herd structure, they'd let the big ones walk and shoot the younger ones. "
Says happy and his sidekick sawtooth. You obviously no nothing about a healthy herd. Or qdm for the matter. "Exactly happy, your last two statements cannot be disputed." You really agree with that non sense. Apparently you two need to jump on different websites and read about deer.
Properly put, that would be you "know" nothing. Someone (2 people in this case) disagrees with you, and automatically, they know nothing? For the record, I am a QDMA member, but you should know that QDMA is FAR more than shooting old bucks. But, that's a different topic.
You are an advocate of an older age structure herd. That is great! I'll try this with simple math.
Let's say we have 5 deer, ages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The average age of the herd is 3 years old. Not we take the 5 year old out of the herd. What happens to the average age? That is correct it drops from 3 to 2.5. Let's put back the 5 year old and take out the 1 year old. The average now becomes 3.5. Clearly, shooting the younger year helped the age structure.
Also, the youngest deer are the ones most susceptible to not making it through the upcoming winter, so why not harvest them first?
So, I conclude that if people REALLY worried about a herd's age structure, they'd let the older deer walk and shoot younger ones. Now we know that will never happen in reality and it really is a misnomer because all that herd structure talk is really just rhetoric by people not wanting others to shoot what they consider to be "inferior" deer. Nature will take care of itself. It always does.
And for the record, I don't believe in only shooting young deer. I told you before I opt to strive for mature deer. I just believe that those people who preach herd structure are spewing rhetoric and really just want people to pass on what they consider to be inferior deer. I feel it is up to the individual in what they can shoot. I made a very valid argument for shooting young deer for those who spew the rhetoric only. Nature takes care of itself.
"You say brown is down means nothing if to many doe's are shot. Well yes I agree. But... We are talking low deer numbers. So why say that?"
I did not say that. Sawtooth did. I simply agreed with him. His comment is accurate IMHO.
I already commented on what I feel is needed - let does walk, shoot bucks for meat. You actually agreed with it.
Then the long forecasted population crash came, and our addiction stayed.
Blame the DNR, the weather, the wolves, the bears, the private land owners, the non-forested public lands, the gun hunters, the crossbows, the city folks buying up farmland for condos, or whatever else makes you feel vindicated, but the fact is, the population has come down from it's crazy peak, and we should not expect to see it again.
Believe it or not, we humans have yet to harness the power to control everything, including mother nature.
It's hunting after all, not "I walk in woods and kill deer".
Hang in there and don't get disappointed. Hunting is very much an attitude game. Get worried and you will not see a thing and probably because you are moving too much trying.
I have chosen to shoot wall hangers or nothing up there until I feel the heard is back to a sustainable number. When I hunt around green Bay and High populated areas I will do my meat hunting.
Beaver is a preferred food source of the wolf. Bear have a fancy for it also. Could all the work by TU in disturbing natural ecosystems and influencing beaver populations be responsible for increased predation on deer by the wolves and bear?
Just a thought.
But if we don't allow kids to shoot any deer they want whenever they want if they have tags, we won't have hunter recruitment and they'll simply play video games the rest of their lives. That is what I read in the Youth Hunt threads anyway.
In 2015 bids were granted for 40 logging jobs, totaling over 12,000 acres of National Forest, some clear cuts, some select cuts and some salvage. There are 4 bids scheduled to be granted yet in 2015. So far only on project did not receive a bid.
In 2014 there were 32 logging jobs that were bid out for just under 9900 acres.
Not to mention County and State logging jobs in the north.
So the process has started and hopefully it will continue and improve the habitat on the northwoods for all the critters.
It will take time to rebuild the herd numbers and the food supply on this acreage should help the herd make it through the winter months.
As far as hunter recruitment, that has to start at home. I didn't shoot a deer until I was 18 and hunted all 6 years previous to that and tagged along with Dad, my Uncles and Grand Dad.
They have to learn that a harvest is the icing on the cake. The hunt just isn't about killing animals, that's only a small portion of being in the woods hunting and that starts at home. Enough of this "We are all winners attitude." It's time to go out and earn something, even at the young age of 10 or 12.
Every day of your life there are winners and there are losers. Nothing good ever comes without hard work and dedication.
It doesn't need to be easy, it needs to be enjoyable and educational.
In the "glory" days when anyone could walk 200 yards from their pickup truck and consistently see deer in abundance there were LESS hunting opportunities available.
We had two options 1) Traditional Bow Hunt with no crossbows other than age 65+ hunters and disabled hunter w/a permit and (w/out Metro Unit extended seasons) 2) Traditional 9 Day Gun Hunt
There was NO separate 7 day muzzleloader season and doe tags were only "good" for the 9 day gun hunt. If you purchased a bow license after opening day you had to wait 3 days to hunt and if you didn't purchase a gun license before the opener you were SOL.
Since that time.... Addition of 7 day Muzzleloader season (not a big deal IMHO)
Creation of T-zones and "early season" 4-day doe hunt December T-zone doe hunts (Huge deal IMHO)
$2 Bonus Tags and Free Doe tags in high pop areas
"Earn a Buck" and "CWD"
Consistent yearly increases in doe tag permits available so the state could advertise record harvest numbers(Big Deal)
Here an "ag tag" there an "ag tag" everywhere an "ag tag"
Holiday hunts and extended gun seasons in Metro Units
Youth Hunts and youth hunters allowed to shoot does (statewide)until age 17 (Big issue for Northern counties)
Addition of Crossbows to anyone during Archery Season (HUGE deal!!)
And on and on and on.....
Why? The state continues to sell a record number of licenses each year and make a record amount of COIN!!
If WE (the deer hunting community) want deer numbers to increase especially in low population areas, WE need to do the following: 1) Shoot less does STATEWIDE...but especially up North 2) Shoot more predators...wolves get all the PR but coyotes are just as bad and there's way more of them
3) Show some restraint and shoot less deer for a couple years
Unfortunately, it won't happen b/c of the "me" first society prevalent today. "I" shot "my" deer so "I" really don't care if (someone else) didn't fill their tag or see deer. It doesn't affect "me."
Simple math....2.2 million deer and 475,000 hunters made for good odds back in the day
Now we have 1/2 the deer, more tags and more seasons
foresters told me, they have lots of cuts scheduled, and a lot of other jobs are being bidded out, and in some areas, it will be select logging, which will be done by the state workers, along with some fed workers......
this new management coop, is going to take some time, but we are headed in the right direction, so that is a problem solved.....
the local feds know what needs to be done. your problem is your congressmen, taking their money,,,,,
I am no wolf lover but the predator that ruined the deer herd in the north was human, and it continues with doe killing//////
I think no does should be shot for at least 3 more years and everyone can learn some conservation....
lot of other areas in the state to go shoot does.....
this state also needs a beefed up warden force. In the western UP, they have more wardens assigned than Wisconsin does in most of the entire north....
my local warden is so stretched its a joke, and top his mileage restriction, because Madison is too cheap on gas etc, believe me, he appreciates that most hunters are honest, but knows the poachers are getting a good break, these days......
Estimated deer population the year I was born ('62) was 400K statewide. It wasn't until the mid-80s that it was estimated to be at or above the million mark. Top deer population estimates were in the mid-90s and again around '99-2000, in the 1.5-1.8 million range. (IMO estimates of 1.5-1.7 a couple times later in the "00s" likely skewed by EAB).
Whether or not you believe in even plus or minus 10 percent when it comes to pre-hunt estimates, the buck kill is the telling factor. Yes, equipment certainly is light years ahead on the bow side (and now crossbows) from days long gone, and more bucks taken by arrows/bolts certainly impacts the gun buck kill. Today, though, it's mostly a north vs. south thing, with ag lands in much of the southern two-thirds of the state hosting plenty of whitetails. Speaking just on my two-county area (and dozens of farm counties produce far more deer than the K/D Peninsula), we're at or very close to hosting as many deer as I've ever seen.
As a state, we've registered a minimum of 140K antlered bucks every year (combined bow/gun) since 1985, three times edging over 200K (1995, 1999 and 2000). Were it not for the north, I believe we'd be knocking on that door again. Better habitat, more action on predators and a big key — milder winters — will gradually improve things in the north. El Nino should help this year!
A final thought: in my early "hunting after school and weekends" years (1974-1979), the best combined gun/bow buck kill in the state was just under 94K my junior year. The best combined overall gun/bow harvestwas 157K, also in fall of '78. It wasn't due to lack of pressure, either. There were more gun deer hunters from '77 on than we had last year in WI. We didn't give up due to lack of deer sightings, and we didn't complain, either. We hunted! We enjoyed the magical time when a whitetail stood where, seconds earlier, there was nothing but trees and brush and grass. Today we're spoiled. We expect far too much. Maybe a good time to market "Shut Up and Hunt" t-shirts??
DT, I'm sure there are many others in your boat, as the habitat "back in the day" varied greatly vs. now, as did hunting pressure. Nothing stays the same. Other possibility is hunt methods. Very few baited in the 70s and no food plots (outside of "ag"). Gun season, no towers, and heated shacks were rare. Guys got cold, you walked. Very few leased. Lots of deer drives to keep animals on their feet every day. Times have changed. Many hunters today, if they're honest, will tell you they see more deer during spring turkey hunting (pre-fawn!) than they do come fall hunts. Whitetails certainly know when the pressure is on, and the number of archers has doubled in the past 40 years. Now add all the intrusion placing and checking cameras, etc.
EXACTLY, I've said this for years on here and get crucified for it. We don't need more hunters, especially the types the DNR is willing to recruit just for the sake of money. It will bite them in the ass bigtime though when no one has anywhere to hunt. They can't keep trying to shove everyone to the public land they refuse to manage either.
As to the original question of what can we do; my recommendation would be to not believe the DNR when they talk about the deer population, the wolf population, or the bear population, and don't take part in the extra deer seasons and don't use the extra tags. Most importantly don't support the DNR, and IMO the DNR's finances should be scrutinized on a yearly basis until they can prove they actually can use their funding in a wise manner which is something I haven't seen in at least a decade.
"And most importantly, don't support the DNR."
DNR has been gutted for many years, by multiple administrations, both D and R controlled; we've got so few wardens now it's ridiculous, a cheater's dream. No more in-person deer registration, and soon no more back tags, and no need to even put a tag on a deer. Today we have county deer advisory committees and folks are still complaining. The legislators and NRB, not the DNR, brought us crossbows.
My belief is the greatest loss of hunters — gun deer license-buyers — has come from two areas: CWD zone and northern forest. One for fear of the disease/loss of interest, the other for not enough deer sightings to justify the travel (though there are still "a few" bright spots across the north).
Deer aren't distributed uniformly across the landscape as a consequence some farmland units do have too many deer.
A four day December antlerless hunt helps to cull the excess deer.
As for too many tags - our Unit has unsold inventory. At $12 a copy no wonder. They should be giving them away for free.
I got no dog in your grudge, Ron. Seems to me that Naz is simply stating the obvious.
Let's not forget to add to that the many private landowners that went to public land to shoot does, so they wouldn't disturb the bucks on their land.
Heck, I live for the day when I only see 5 deer (instead of 15) during an evening sit. Seeing 5 is seeing a healthy herd to me. In the areas I hunt with fewer deer there are more big bucks too.
Key word there is soon.
Check the legislative proposals. Back tags you knew about. Getting rid of the need to tag a deer was just introduced. I guess some of these legislators figure dinking and doinking around with hunting rules is more important than putting more wardens in the field, repairing roads or improving our public school system.
I don't know anyone that actually did that and how silly it would be if it happened, although people did talk about doing it. ;-) Just like people talk about registering crossbow killed deer as bow killed, more silliness. Gotta be careful when it comes to believing everything you read. Most landowners I know including myself never had such a lack of deer that we really had to worry about taking a few doe every year, in fact we've been doing just that long before the big CWD scare was tossed out there. It was the big picture we were concerned about. Knowing how the DNR was mismanaging their public lands (and trying to get private landowners to mismanage theirs) having a few excess deer on the private lands seemed and still seems like a good idea.
I hear the theory of how the DNR didn't pull the triggers hunters did and I get that, but for you few DNR backers that can't believe they ever could make a mistake; bottom line is that without the excess tags, excess seasons, the save a tree bs, and the save a deer from CWD by killing a different deer bs all those hunters you blame could not have accomplished what they did if an irresponsible amount of tags hadn't been shoveled out year after year after year, and it still continues.
"Simple going out and killing deer just to kill them is not hunting. That is slaughtering and then to complain about there being no deer a few years down the road is a joke."
I agree, and I also don't know anyone who did that either. Most of the slaughtering I heard of was by yahoos hunting public lands, more than likely misguided by an idea that the deer population drastically needed to be reduced to save the deer population from CWD...???
"I got no dog in your grudge, Ron."
BTW I'm not Ron. If you put down the drink and paid attention you would know that. ;-)
what good does county local control do, they continue to hammer does........
I didn't read it, I have seen both with my own eyes. It's still very common for large gun hunting groups to pound public land when some of the members are Landowners that don't want young bucks and does shot on their land. if you don't believe this happens you are just naive.
I'm not Crusader, but I do own land in the UP and read up on the rest of MI (as well as hunting in WI).
The 12 counties put in APRs 2 years ago in the LP was a trial. So far, it seems that the people in those counties have liked what they've seen but the jury is still out. I would not be surprised though, if the LP went to something APR-ish statewide.
MI is basically a one buck state with a caveat. You can buy a buck tag and it is good for bow or gun. Or, you can buy a combo tag which allows you 2 bucks (any weapon) but one has to have a minimum of 3pts on one side and the 2nd one has to have a minimum of 4pts on one side. Where I hunt in the UP, the combo tag APRs have not lead to more and bigger bucks. The UP has dinks for bucks for the most part.
You forgot a few things from the "glory" days. One was you got an archery tag, good for choice of buck or doe...one tag, no extra antlerless tag to fill the freezer while you waited for a buck of your liking.
Another was that there was very much less baiting, in Counties that still allow it, it is hard to find someone that doesn't bait....I only know of 2 or 3 that don't bait and I know of very many that do bait and they talk of all their friends that bait. I have yet to hear someone talking about deer hunting that doesn't bait around me.
The other is the enclosed stands and heaters that keep hunters in their stand as long as they want...that was mentioned by Naz.
One other thing that just came to me was the advance in communications, years ago if you heard someone from your group shoot...or thought you heard them shoot, you would have to walk over to them to see if they hit one and needed help tracking or dragging. Now you either ask over your hand-held radio or text them.
Every time someone shot or someone got too cold to sit any longer, they made a mini drive to those around them.
We used to have a guy that sat on a field edge every year before he passed away a few years back. He would usually see close to 20 deer every opening day(sometimes 40 or more) years ago, most were probably the same deer being bumped from one area to another since he could see over a half mile of field. His last few seasons had his sightings drop, those dropped sightings directly correlated with some of the neighbors using heated enclosed blinds. The number of deer crossing the fields has dropped considerably, while our local population has soared to all-time heights over the past 10 years.
I have baited when it was legal. Every morning I would take a little plastic trick or treating pumpkin of corn to my shooting lane and dump it. Climb my tree and a little 6 would come in. I loved watching him. But I never shot a deer that year.
I know guys who only rut hunt their land when they know they have some nice bucks on camera, and hunt every piece of public land the rest of the year.
I hunt in my climber all season so I get cold and get down and walk toward my brother and father. My dad has done it for years. But now at 70 he gets too cold so I am building him a box blind.
I know that when we hunted public land as a kid my grandfather always said never pass a buck, no matter what. I didn't get any satisfaction shooting a spike after my first deer so I adopted a new way of thinking. But that was back when you got one deer per party tag. had to walk in two miles in the woods to get to your stand and never saw another hunter. that is also when all the trophies he shot came from that I still have on my wall. That was in Lake Nebagomon Wi , you don't get a whole lot further north in WI. But now there are logging trails through those woods that anyone can easily access. So more hunters hunt there with more tags and you see fewer deer.
That being said, I think we do need to recruit hunters. Our children, or younger relatives and teach them that it is ok to end your season without a deer. Eventually they will be successful. I pass deer and go without some years just because I feel it was the right thing to do. But it is not something I was taught. It was something I taught my father, brother, step son and eventually my son. Its ok to go home disappointed. There is a lifetime of hunts. Its called hunting not killing. There is no participation trophies in this sport. And I like it better that way.
