Bowsite.com

10700 Antlerless Tags Bayfield County

I understand in some areas of Bayfield County, especially private farmland there are pockets that hold allot of deer, so how do you distribute these doe tags to these specific areas without compromising the other areas that barely have deer? As it is right now if we have one bad winter in the future it will decimate what deer herd we have left. I think there nuts.

Public and private tags.

Winter motality is more severe the higher the population is, not the other way around.

The only experience I have in Bayfield County is in one property that I worked on and the deer numbers were very high there. It's my understanding that this isn't the case throughout the county however.

The public/private tags go a long ways towards alleviating this disparity but at some point hunters have to taje some responsibility and not harvest does in areas where the numbers don't warrant it.

"Public and private tags." How would they draw the lines? Last time I purchased a doe tag within Bayfield County it was for unit 3 and this unit covered a huge area.

Let us know if this number is true. I find that number extremely too high from what I see in that County. The public/private thing is something I am still not sure is working. With the current license/ registration system how many private deer are taken on public lands?

Skookumjt.....I understand about the high population and there's plenty of a natural food sources out there to sustain what population we do have, they still have to get to it and then predators now come into play. If a bad winter happens I believe Bayfield County could easily lose 10700 deer.

Well I just read the minutes from that meeting, which anyone can do, on line. according to the printed minutes, it looks like a 3800 quota was proposed, and than a split with a number of 625........ logging practices and forest regeneration were main concerns.....

go on the cdac site, and read it for yourself............

5. 2017 DEER SEASON RECOMMENDATIONS PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATION SEE PRELIMINARY 2017 DEER HARVEST QUOTA AND PERMIT RECOMMENDATION FORM DISCUSSION Al House, non voting Alt Chair- Suggest Conservative number of doe tags. Craig Manthey- against any antlerless harvest, constituents are not seeing the numbers of deer the WDNR is reporting.Kenneth Johnson- Feels there are more deer, supprorts antlerless quota leading to 9-17% herd growth.Mike Amman- Supported antlerless quota leading to 10% herd growth Tom Erickson-9% herd growth, Ben Dufford 9-17% Leaning towards 10% ACTION Motions: Motion to have an Antlerless Season: Passed 4-1 with Craig Manthey opposing. Motion by Tom Erickson, seconded by Ben Dufford to establish the antlerless quota at 3,800 passed 4-1 with only Craig Manthey opposing. Motion tomade by Ben Dufford, seconded by Mike Amman to split antlerless permits by 625 Private Land and 38% Public land.passed 4-1 with Craig Manthey opposing.

Here is a response from Kenneth Johnson on this letter that was posted on Face Book and who voted and sits on the Deer Advisory Council. The letter above is a little misleading as it left out some important info. The actual target reduction in the heard in Bayfield County is around 2500 (I can't remember the exact number without my notes). Issuing just 2500 tags will not result in 2500 tags filled. The DNR can estimate how many tags need to be sold to reach the desired quota (based on past years) and that's where the 10,700 number comes from. It does not mean the DNR is looking for 10,700 extra deer kills. It should also be noted that 68% of those tags will be sold for private lands only and 32% will be for public lands due to the fact that the highest concentration of does are in the farm areas (mason, Benoit etc.. )

Razor, can you put up a link. When I look for the minutes I can't find them on the CDAC website.

Smoky I sent you a PM on how to get on the site,,,,, go to cdac meetings, and the site will come up under that heading, follow my pm directions

One thing nice about cdac, is I have read, every proposal, for every county from the last meetings, interesting stuff, if your into deer hunting

Also the numbers discussed above do not include crop damage tags that are issued to specific farms/orchards.

Thanks, I found it. Not enough coffee this morning or brain not started yet ;-)

Well it passed, they will be giving doe tags out in Bayfield County this hunting season. It was even presented that car deer crashes have not even increased in the last 5 years. Very disappointed!

So it begins again. The DNR and those that influence them can not leave the deer herd to rebuild. Please don't tell me this is CDAC and not the DNR, they still control it.

Instead of allowing the CDAC's to work as intended, department personnel and forestry people have corrupted this to suit their wants. This only further alienates the public to department initiatives that purport to include the sportsmen.

I've seen an increase in the numbers of deer I've seen in Bayfield County over the last year, but my anecdotal sightings don't seem to me to warrant a doe season. I'm not a biologist. I may be one of the types of guys who irks the biologists. I won't be killing a doe in the Chequamegon. If I want to kill a doe, maybe I'll go to Door County.

"Well it passed, they will be giving doe tags out in Bayfield County this hunting season. It was even presented that car deer crashes have not even increased in the last 5 years. Very disappointed!"

It appears to me that giving out deer tags and deciding how many antlerless tags to give out is yet another practice (much like EAB was) that will have to be taken away from the DNR as they can't seem to do this in a reasonable and responsible manner (that will protect the resource) either. They continue to exhibit bad management decisions, I wonder if this is that wonderful "new DNR" I kept hearing about?

I wish the hunters would band together (Mutiny) buy the tags and not use them! I know I am.

I too will try and get a tag and then burn it , talked to business owner Monday and they are hurting. Poor weather for snow Machs. has kept people away, but there main problem is the poor management of the DNR. Deer hunter numbers are way down the last few years. I have a small lot "campsite" and i will still be hunting the area, but man the #s just dont jive with killing Does.

Looks like the wolves n Bears are taking enough ! What a joke thank the DNR and the input of the foresters, Devastating for the future of the Deer herd in Bayfield county!!! Couple bad winters and another ten year recovery period this doesn't include tribal or Agriculture tags!

"68% of those tags will be sold for private lands only and 32% will be for public lands "

Harvest of 2500 total goal makes that 1700 private/ 800 public.

Smokey where did you get your information as the minutes are not posted yet for this past Mondays 17th meeting?

Buying a tag and not filling it really doesn't do much good does it?

Won't they just issue even more tags the following year?

I'm assuming they went with their preliminary numbers from last month but I can't open it on my phone to check.

Buying tags to keep deer from being shot has a marginal effect because the historical success rate is used for calculating the number of tags issued. It would take a very large number of people to have a significant impact.

The minutes from the meeting on Monday have not been posted yet, so instead on relying on my friends that were there I will wait to see what the minutes say before I comment anymore. I am hearing different stories.

I assume these numbers are predicated on a 2017 wolf season... Bayfield cnty is a great example of the have and have-nots. If your hunting several squares and the only hunters there then burning tags will absolutely help the area. We thought one more year of no anterless tags and we'll be back to seeing some deer regularly.

Disappointing to say the least. Just because many of us are seeing a few more deer anecdotally, doesn't mean we should shoot them off! It's called a slight rebuild or recovery from an extreme population crash! There had better be a 2017 wolf season with some harvest goals that are not a joke and will impact wolf populations so this doe harvest will have less impact. Those of you who bought cabins in Bayfield Co. or own small businesses that rely on deer hunters to keep the business afloat, you must be about ready to grab the pitchforks.

Impact on local businesses? They have taken a huge hit. I know two rifle hunting seasons ago the local motel (used to be a Super 8) had 3 hunters booked for the opener, that's it, 3 hunters. It didn't even seem like hunting season up here.

Here are the correct doe tag numbers for Bayfield County. 10,700 issued. 62% private, 38% public. The target herd reduction is 3800. Allegedly the DNR expects a 9% increase in the herd size even with 3800 harvested.

So they allbought into global warming with no winterkill? Lol

MF, I used numbers from your April 12th post here.

Doing the same actions again and again and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity and this tag allotment. One thing for sure is our group of 10 bow hunters and gun hunters were not going to repeat whats happened in the not so distant past.

howdidyougethenumbers...........minutesarenotprintedyet

whyareyoutypinglikethat? Kenny Johnson sits on the CDAC and he sent me the finale numbers.

computer

Register here to reply to this topic