Abuse of MFL open.
Wisconsin
I was out working on a clients property this afternoon and the client came out to run his dogs.
While we were catching up, he told me he was pulling his property out of the open MFL program. He had a too many problems with hunters abusing his property this year. Guys hunting out of his enclosed deer stands, using the heaters in the blinds, putting out 100# piles of corn under his stands, driving atv's and trucks all over his property.... The list was pretty long. Just yesterday he had a group of hound hunters tell him he "couldn't go in there" because they were chasing a coyote. The final thing was having a gang of 21 guys drive the property every day after opening weekend of rifle season. They were filling private land antlerless tags when public land tags were required.
This is a very well managed 600 acre piece that was a great spot for deer, grouse, woodcock, and turkeys. It will be a loss for hunters with no land of their own.
Last week another client told me he was taking his 250 acre property out of open MFL as well. Hunters had put up several elevated box blinds, made his primary access road impassable from driving trucks and atv's continuously, and illegal baiting (before season and more than was legal).
It's becoming a common theme with the landowners I deal with. It's a shame that hunters cant appreciate and respect the opportunity that this program is. In a time when I constantly hear people gripe that they can't find anywhere to hunt it's pretty frustrating.
I wouldn't want to put up with that either.
I'm surprised that the "legal" hunters using that land did not "act" on any of those situations that they may have observed on the property.
I have a good little fishing spot that the land owner lets people fish at. He has put out a 55 gallon drum for the garbage to be thrown in.
Many time I myself have "policed" the area for trash (some people cannot walk twenty feet) and have even emptied the trash - took it home and disposed of it because I don't want to lose access.
I'm sure it's just a few bad apples....but that's all it takes folks. A couple 2 - 3 Idiots!
Sadly most of those people will never care enough to visit this site or read these posts that's why I always stop those a holes and say something to them if I see them
Not sure there are any benefits to having land in open mfl now that closed can be leased. A landowner can lease which will cover their taxes plus make a profit. They don't have to put up with all the b.s. from a few morons that give hunters a bad name.
So imagine those people that disrespect private property when they are on public property. Aside from the "legal" activities, land stewardship is not running rampant.
Those same types of slob hunters do the same on other types of public land. A large factor in this is that wardens are spread way too thin.
I have a feeling that it will take a few years before the slobs leave the area. They will continue to try to hunt there, tearing down no trespassing signs, because they've been hunting there for years. After it gets through their thick skulls that it isn't open for hunting, they will be pissed at the owner for closing the property and dump trash and vandalize the property for a few years since the owner was a "jerk" for closing the property. They won't be smart enough to figure out that they were the reason that the owner closed the land. Really sad actually.
my initial thought was he should call the warden. Those are obvious offenses no matter where you hunt. But why should you have to call the warden on your own property, nobody needs that. I agree w/ fivers, to take things that far is pretty bold. Skook this has to be an isolated situation?
"But why should you have to call the warden on your own property, nobody needs that." No one should have to call the sheriff's department either. But it's a sad fact of life....Wardens don't deal with trespassers, people that damage property, etc.
I agree totally, but if the "slobs" are not taught a lesson, perhaps a citation and a fine, when will they learn that they are wrong. As a private property owner I have been attacked when I am not on the property. I had over $7500 worth of damage done the weekend before the youth hunt a few years back. After putting an article in the local paper and putting up posters letting everyone know there was a $1000 reward the "crap" stopped. No one was ever arrested, but I have not had any issues since. No damage and no more trespassers. Was the problem solved or did it just get kicked down the road? I believe that the issue has been resolved because none of my neighbors have had any more issues either.
"Wardens don't deal with trespassers, people that damage property, etc."
I'm pretty sure it is wardens that would deal with issues on open mfl land.
This is not at all an isolated instance. I hear about it more than you would believe and it's getting worse.
Most of the issues would be the responsibility of the sheriff's department but the over baiting and using the wrong tags would be issues for wardens. The fact is landowners face retribution for calling the authories so they are reluctant. In addition, the authories are spread to thin and don't have time to work cases any more.
When we bought our property it had been owned by an absentee owner for over twenty years. The owner did not care who hunted it or spent time there. The worst offender was the guy next door-he'd built some "tree forts" and other stuff like leaving milk crates and other assorted to sit on. I introduced myself shortly after we closed on the land. I mentioned the tree forts and he admitted that this was his handiwork and he DID take them down because I told him that if he chose not to I surely would. I also cleaned up 4 big garbage bags of beer cans and the like. The first year I permitted him to hunt (gun) with the proviso that his bunch would stay on the eastern half for the first weekend. He said that would be good except the bunch came over to the other half 9 am opener. The following year he called the night before season asking if he could hunt again. Told him that wince I'd not heard anything I made other plans. His response was "Where the hell am I going to hunt?". Said that the night before season was a little late to ask that. We've had a little trouble since then but not much except for his German Shepherd that he allowed to run loose. The mutt got older and finally died and no problems since. Bottom line-if people can they will be slobs and those are the few that landowners remember....I never could figure out why he didn't just buy it. It was for sale for two years and we paid a little more than the price of a Bad Boy Buggy. I'd NEVER go MFL "open". Just my $.02-LC
Mike F - Sorry to hear that you had a similar experience. What did they damage?
Three years ago property I have been taking care of went into FML... it is 40 acres but only 20 acres of the back half was put into FML. About a week before the rifle season I decided to take a walk and check the property, this is what I found. I ended taking down 3 stands. All stands were placed on the private property side of the land but the damage they did was incredible. I posted a note at each spot in a Ziploc bag if they want there stands back they were to call me. Never did get a call back but landed 3 brand new ladder stands. Thinking back I should have just left all stands and called the Sheriff, they all would have gotten fines for trespassing and destruction of property.
It is so sad, and makes me mad, when I see how people treat the land,,,,,, The mess left on public land is bad, and yes it is left by hunters because in the fall, that is who is out there for the most part....... They all have the smoker mentality, when your done with it, just pitch it, no matter where it goes..................
Someone allowing you to hunt on their land is a special priviledge, and when I am awarded that , or allowed to hunt on MFL or FCL , I treat that land like it is my own and with respect..........................
For the record, all law enforcement has the authority to enforce laws under the criminal statues, they all have that power, it is a local and bureau matter, how it is handled,,,,,,, When I was on the job, we would get complaints on illegal hunting, and trespass etc,,,,, When we had down time, we sat on a lot of complaints, but we had more time, than the warden, who is covering a big area,,,,,, We caught a lot of hunters, and each and everyone was prosecuted from our side, we did not have any road side PR chats, they knew exactly what they were doing, they did not BS me
One night I had a guy run, and threw away his bow, a custom made Bruin,,,, I had to laugh, what an idiot, the fine would be less than the bow, he just dropped,,,,, someone got a good deal at the yearly auction open to the public only
MFL Open is a good program for some. It is a great way for the landowner to reduce their taxes . I would only suggest to those that don't hunt. I would also suggest that a landowner post a sign and let people know what is allow, by law, on MFL lands, and examples of what isn't allowed by law.
When using MFL lands Open to public recreation, the public: • May access the land only for the purposes of hunting, fishing, hiking, sightseeing and cross country skiing. • May access the land without asking permission. • May access the land only by foot unless given other permission by the landowner(s). • May use legal hunting methods including baiting and temporary tree stands during the hunting season(s). Land, trees or other property may not be damaged. • May not use motorized vehicles or conduct target practice without landowner’s permission. • May not damage the property or anything on it.
The vast majority of hunters that use MFL Open lands do it as legally required. One more thing, the DNR will not enforce trespassing laws (for the most part). If you have an issue always call your local sheriff even on MFL lands. BC
I'm not surprised. We humans have a long history of shitting in our own nests, shooting ourselves in the foot, etc., pick your favorite cliche'. Personally I don't care what program they're offering or what the financial gain would be, when they got to the line where Joe public gets to hunt my land I would've pushed the pen and paper back across the desk because it ain't worth it.
I hate to see mfl disappear as the majority of my hunting is on those lands. However I've learned to avoid the mfl properties that are hunted by owners. They often are playing the system for low taxes and hoping no one really tries to hunt it. I don't like paying taxes either so don't blame them really. Absentee mfl land owners I generally contact and almost always gain permission to hang stands without issue. If you have heated stands on your mfl hunting land and time to count the number of drivers that show up and check which type of harvest tags 21 different guys have then you likely shouldn't have your land in mfl open. Not making light of slob hunters as they are a real problem. Trash in the woods makes us all look bad especially at multi use recreation areas. This particular instance sounds more like the owner is pulling it since it was actually used by public hunters?as stated- The final thing was having a gang of 21 guys drive the property every day after opening weekend of rifle season. They were filling private land antlerless tags when public land tags were required.
I highly doubt that all 21 guys had no public harvest tags, but possibly. And I'm sure they had some open buck tags. Group bagging is aloud, weather or not we like it. To see a group of 21 guys drive a property is really pretty impressive. I have a hard time getting 4 guys coordinated to do a push.
I think some law enforcement either don't want to deal with stuff like this or don't know it falls within their scope. I have contacted county cops before about dumping garbage on public land. One told me it was the DNR's responsibility. The other seemed like I was wasting his time. I still believe if there were enough wardens to be more visible during hunting/fishing seasons. It would keep some of these slobs on the straight and narrow. We all need to turn violations in when we see it. If you turn a blind eye, you are part of the problem.
When several trucks drive across your property and twenty one guys get out and line up on a field, it's pretty easy to count them. The landowner got down and talked to them and asked them not to drive vehicles on the property. He ended up having to put trees across his roads to stop them. He was told by the hunters they only had private land tags and buck tags yet they shot does.
Why shouldn't a landowner have heated stands on their own property? They didn't mind hunters on their property but now they are being taken advantage of and hunters just lost access to 600 acres.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have heated stands and whatever else he wants on his land, but shouldn't care if 100 guys make a drive and sounds like that's more what the pulling out of mfl is about. From what I see, Mfl is great for landowners that don't use their land. Seems like a bad idea for a guy who uses his land for any type of recreational purposes
Guys poaching without proper tags I sure hope he called that in. Trucks driven where foot access is only permitted, hopefully called that in as well. At least call a towing company to come impound the vehicles.
"I agree totally, but if the "slobs" are not taught a lesson, perhaps a citation and a fine, when will they learn that they are wrong." --That ship has sailed many years ago for most of these types. Pigs will be pigs. I could go on and on through a rant, but it's a waste of time... I'm better served to spend my time out picking up garbage that others so kindly leave behind.
Honestly the landowner is saving probably $20 grand+ in taxes having it in open mfl. With 600 acres enrolled he should know enough that a ton of hunters will show up. On top of it he hunts also? Lol. Best option would be to put it in closed and lease 300 of it to a few guys only.
There seem to be those in this thread that like blaming the landowner. Then again that is the way the world seems to be going, damn libs.
Sorry can't feel sorry for a landowner who pays very little in taxes in return opens up 600 acres to the public, then complains when they make a drive. Lol. It would be nice to expect every hunter to be courteous and respectful but with that large of an area it's going to draw a crowd so that is not realistic. Do you want to save 20 grand or put up with b.s? I think all landowners in open mfl should have designated parking area marked or have a barrier that cannot be driven through.
Isn't there a hunter per acre limitation?
I would never purchase private land, then make it public. Defeats the purpose of my investment.
Missouri. MFL open doesn't make it public. I know what you mean, but there are only certain activities allowed.
Many enter into MFL for the timber investment. Many do not hunt, so allowing others trespass is acceptable.
MFL is a super program, affording those who wish to practice sound forestry, the ability to do so. Owning wooded land, taxation is cost prohibitive. Without help, Woodland owners resort to ill-advised logging, setting property back decades.
Even with MFL reduction in tax burden, the Woodland owner still pays more than the factory farmer for like average. I will argue, having a Woodland is more environmentally sound and is significant to the timber industry in the state.
So, note to all, it is not all about "tax" savings.
I agree with you.
I invest for my own use and privacy, forest management is done by me, with assistance from private foresters and loggers.
RJN, yeah let's blame the land owner instead of the slob hunters that do nothing but take and use. Maybe if those "hunters" had to do some work to be able to hunt the land or had some other investment into it. Maybe then they would treat it with some respect.
There is 100 acres down the road from us that is mfl open. There was 16 vehicles parked there opening morning of gun. It sounds like wwii every yr. Our land will never thrive like it should because of this open land. I can't imagine what 600 acres would be like. Unless the LO simply can't afford the taxes, common sense would tell me to transfer it to closed mfl. No headaches plus your still on a forestry management plan. This situation sounds like putting a cake in front of a fat kid and expecting him not to eat it. The lo wants to hunt his own land in peace but opens it up to public hunting. Lol
RJN, you are right. It would be much better if all landowners would just lease their land out. I'm only partially kidding. at least if someone was paying to hunt it they may have more respect for the land.
I agree with private leasing. It is a proven model to work in many states, and will increase in Wisconsin. Good for the landowner, and any hunter who cares to give a little.
Tax payer subsidized hunting on private lands whether block management in the west, or various forest type of subsidies always brings on the ya-hoo crowds. I have tried it, terrible. You can have good forest and ecology resource management without the government and public interfering.
Yes, blame the landowner for being upset people were sitting in his blinds, using his heater, illegally baiting (putting him at risk had he unknowingly hunted the stand), driving trucks on roads that weren't all season roads, shooting illegal deer, telling him he couldn't go on his own land..... Makes sense.
Skook- so this landowner is your client to make improvements to his land and it's enrolled in open mfl? Lol. This just doesn't make sense. Obviously these yahoos have been violating the mfl rules, if the dnr/Leo doesn't enforce anything why would any landowner have there land in open mfl? This guy hires you, puts up elevated stands, wants very low taxes on his 600, and his land is public hunting. Seems odd to me. Why not just transfer to closed?
Yes, he has hired me to do different projects. I was shearing brush for a habitat project. Why would he not improve his own property? He and his family hunt and enjoy wildlife. I have no idea why you think they are violating MFL rules, but he wasn't.
He had no problem with people hunting his property. I've even seen him tell people where they are likely to find grouse, etc. He has also raised and released pheasants every year I have known him because he likes to work his dogs but has also told people where they are likely to find those. He shouldn't have to put up with people abusing the privilege by using his personal property, tearing up roads with vehicles, telling him not to walk on his own property, illegally baiting, illegally hunting, etc.
If you look at my initial post, you will see that the landowner is going to transfer to closed MFL. That was the whole point. The public is going to lose out on what was a great opportunity because some hunters can't help but ruin things.
Skook- I meant the hunters are violating the rules and if the dnr/Leo doesn't enforce anything why would any one want there land in open. I think he will be a lot happier in closed and will be much easier to manage. Seems counterproductive to make all kinds of improvements just to have an army of hunters destroy it every yr. If taxes are still to high for him to pay, leasing is an option also.
Clearly this thread was started to bash hunters and make them look bad, in fact I think someone might have embellished just a tad to create even more hunter hatred. It's unfortunate that the DNR and their die-hard fans/employees/business partners continue casting hunters in a negative light every chance they get. That said, I wonder how the DNR is doing when it comes to improving their relationship with hunters and landowners?
Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
Speaking of having no idea what you're talking about. :-)
I can see why you stopped posting in that thread, even i was starting to feel sorry for you.
Skook is this a few apples spoiling it here for everyone? These stories seem crazy and the MFL open plan should work w/ some common sense. I don't like the the leasing thing because your closing land accessibility for the good hunters too and it won't come back. WI is not Illinois or Texas nor should we want it to be
I used to think it was a case of a few spoiling it for the rest, but it seems like lately there are more hunters who don't respect other people's properties unfortunately than the ones that appreciate the opportunity. I am not bashing all hunters, just pointing out that 1000 acres of quality hunting ground that I work with will not be available for public recreation next year, and there are a lot of others as well.
I guess it depends on the company one keeps, I really don't think that's the main reason for hunting land loss . A lot of landowners greatly restricted access to their lands simply in an attempt to keep a few deer around since the DNR was (and still is) doing the opposite by trying to kill them all. Speaking of meetings, I was at several where landowners clearly explained to the DNR what would happen if they continued with the kill everything mentality, but they didn't care. More private access restricted so public lands got busier, then eventually public lands got decimated, and here we are. Unfortunately still with a DNR that doesn't seem concerned with anything but killing even more deer. You can't fix worthless.
HunterR - Your wrong!
Your bashing of the WDNR is misguided at the very least - we as hunters have the responsibility and the ability to kill deer. Hunters kill deer.
CDAC has been a great aid in watching the deer numbers and subsequent tags made available - nearly 100% of the time the WDNR goes along with the CDAC proposal on tags and the hunter - now has a voice and a stake in what happens in his/her zone.
Is CDAC perfect? Is life perfect? No - but never before has the common man had so much input into what the WDNR actual does on deer numbers and tags available.
Never before have we as hunters had such access to what is happening in their little piece of the State.
Thank you WDNR - should have happened 20 years ago.
Yes Bloodtrail, hunters kill deer. Hunter's kill deer based on the number of tags the DNR issues. If the DNR irresponsibly gives out way too many tags (year after year after year) all while misleading people on deer numbers I fail to see how hunters are responsible.
"Never before have we as hunters had such access to what is happening in their little piece of the State. Thank you WDNR - should have happened 20 years ago."
I agree, we do have more access. Access that doesn't mean squat as the old guard is unfortunately still strong, but yes, more access. Access only made possible because the DNR you're thanking was spanked into submission to provide it.
What exactly am I wrong about?
HunterR -
It's people like yourself who bitch, piss and moan about the DNR and the tags they give out. When in reality, they are not shooting the deer - you and I are shooting the deer!!
If there are fewer deer in your area, don't shoot a deer. Have your buddies - not shoot a deer.
Hunters have to START taking some responsibility!!!
So easy to state - ..."Damn DNR issued too many tags again"... WE are the people in the field and WE are the one's dropping the string on the herd.
Show up at the CDAC meeting for your County and argue - the "Don't shoot a deer theory - there are not many deer left here!" Argue that not so many tags should not be issued and talk with neighbors, fellow hunters in the area and Sportsman Clubs.
Other than complaining here on Bowsite - what have you actually done?
It's easy to whine about "a problem" but what constructive conclusion to remedy the problem do you bring to the table?
Mine is to become actively involved in CDAC.
I have involved myself in the CDAC program and I believe that it's the best thing for WI deer since the invention of the tin can!
Is it the perfect program? - NO. That program does not exists like so many things in life!
And here's were your wrong -
"Unfortunately still with a DNR that doesn't seem concerned with anything but killing even more deer. You can't fix worthless."
Maybe you should apply and get a job with the WDNR!! You could take the bull by the horns and get things turned around and headed in the right direction...or, complain on Bowsite.
I know many fine people in the WDNR and they work hard to make things right. Do they always get it right - No, but like many of us, they try hard.
To blatantly bash the department is just plain wrong!
Loosing hunting access is the greatest problem of retaining or adding current, future hunters. Then you have a group of individuals screwing it for everyone is a crime and a lost to everybody. Just learned that no vehicle areas on public will be open to ATV's, the burn are going down, this is another sad account that will diminish the hunting lands, sad time for Wi. public hunters. Bloodtrail, it is not the DNR it is the legislators that set the course that the DNR follows and unfortunately it is the RNC that is doing it.
Bloodtrail there are plenty of deer in my area due to managed lands and landowners not buying the kill every deer and deer are vermin mentality of the DNR. You assume a lot and are wrong about most, in fact too much for me to try and explain. Just keep thinking what you'e thinking and keep yelling it louder and louder, someone might eventually hear you.
I'm also entitled to my opinion that the DNR burns through a lot of funding to accomplish very little. I tend to not join or work for groups that I think are "less than worthwhile" :-) but instead ask questions related to the amount of funding and the returns coming from that funding. I've learned that sometimes that's a more effective way to get results. To each his own.
"Show up at the CDAC meeting for your County and argue - the "Don't shoot a deer theory - there are not many deer left here!" Argue that not so many tags should not be issued and talk with neighbors, fellow hunters in the area and Sportsman Clubs."
Yup, then we can hear how they don't want or need the input of barstool biologists. It can't work both ways. The DNR wants what they say treated as gospel. But when their gospel flops. Then the barstool biologists should determine how many deer should be shot in their area.
The biggest abuse of MFL Open that I've seen recently, are the owners that put their property in open except for a few feet around the border with a nearly impossible access point. An example would be that someone owns 80 acres and puts the property in MFLO, but doesn't enroll the outside 10 feet of property, so there is no direct access. Say that property touches a larger block of DNR land that has access from a public road, but to get to the MFLO property, you need to walk over a mile and cross a river that is too deep to wade...even though the MFLO property has frontage on a public road. This is happening more and more.
There are MFLO parcels that are landlocked and the owners do it intentionally. It's dirty pool. What makes it worse id the DNR knows about it and does not care.
In order to enroll a parcel in open MFL it cannot be landlocked. It has to have reasonable walking access to a public road or access from public land.
It used to be possible to create landlocked parcels by having different ownership but that was allowed by statute. The DNR had no authority to do anything about it. The Legislature did.
Skook- I have found a few local mfl lands that can't be accessed unless you know something I haven't figured out yet? You certainly seem to know about these programs so I'm all ears. For example a local 80 acre parcel with private on 3 sides. The front (road frontage side) 60ish acres are tillable which are not in mfl (only the back wooded 20 is mfl) legally it's one continuous parcel, just divided by dnr for mfl purpose. I'd say half the mfl lands in a 30 mile radius of me have simular means of land locking. I've been able to gain access to some by asking owner or neighbor but some owners are hard to locate.
I asked a forester about a land owner keeping a few feet of private boundary around the entire MFLO property and was told there has to be a designated access to the property.
The only way that it used to be possible is if the land was under totally different ownership. It could be done with LLC's or putting them in different names (husband, wife, children, etc.). If that isn't the case, there is a walking access from public roads or public property for every open MFL entry.
Since 2016, it has not been possible to enter land in open MFL without a permanent access.
If you have a specific example, give me a legal description and I should be able to figure it out for you assuming the county real estate records are available online.
Retro-as I mentioned it was possible before to create a landlocked MFL. The few feet idea never was allowed. An open MFL had to have a 4:1 ratio of length to width. For example if it was a 40 long (1320'), it had to be 330' deep.
When I talked to the forester here in Chippewa county about several landlocked parcels. His response was they know about them and there is nothing they can or will do. But this is the same guy that didn't want to do anything about landowners posting MFLO property.
He's right if they are truly landlocked. I have never heard of a forester who didn't follow up on people posting MFL open lands. I would be happy to pass those on to the tax law enforcement specialists.
Are you able to get out of your MFL contact due to public abuse of the property?
"I have never heard of a forester who didn't follow up on people posting MFL open lands."
I got him to handle it by being persistent. I just kept calling and asking about it until the problem was resolved. He has been very helpful in other instances I have contacted him.
Anyone can withdraw from MFL or change from open to closed once. Before 2016, if you withdrew you had to repay all of the tax reduction accrued during enrollment. Since then you only have to pay some. I believe it's 5 years worth but I am not sure off the top of my head.
I should have been more clear, can you get out without penalty if you can prove your land is being abused/misused?
I attend a lot of Woodland owner conferences knowing most DNR foresters. Do you mind PMing me the forester in Chip's name and I can follow up on this disregard for following up on posting open open parcels?
The land-locked parcels are no longer possible. Never may be a strong work as there are always unscrupulous owners who uncover loop holes in program guidelines that ruin the perception of the MFL program.
As far as posting OMFL parcels, many times this is because a user decides they want the parcel to themselves, and unbeknownst to landowner (who may live elsewhere) the land is illegally posted.
All in all, the MFL is a great program for the environment. It also is significant to the the timber industry....very. I personally contributed a lot to the bottom line of Verso operations in Rapids, logger families, hauler families...I can't say enough how the MFL program has provided benefit. My priority is environmental protection...check.
It is unregulated harvests on non-MFL enrolled properties that is giving Forestry a black eye.
In the end, to be a Woodland owner, many need an incentive to practice Forestry and own the wooded property. Wooded property is disproportionately taxed which goes against Sound Forestry management. Ag property gets lightly taxed and those properties are annual income producers. Not all Ag is bad, but between soil erosion, animal waste runoff, repeated pesticide applications...I will always favor forest ecology. There is a bigger picture.
After some messages with shook, I got in touch with my local forester. Had a good conversation about access to a few mfl parcels. If you happen to find a land owner that's playing the game of no access, call your forester as they want to know and have access to all mfl lands. Glad this thread was started as I've now been informed of how I can get boots on 3 mfl parcels that I thought where land locked.
HunterR Instead of coming up with something constructive on how to curb unnecessary spending as you refer to it as "burns up a lot of funding" you offer no solution to your vague statement other than to "ask questions".
So your question(s) asking is providing results? An example would be interesting. Because if all we had to do is sit on our thumbs and ask questions, there's are allot of good people wasting their time!
Your right about two (2) two things however.."to each their own"...and "your entitled to your opinion".
Thanks for the input!
Camp2Dukes sez -
"Bloodtrail why does the DNR exist in the deer world? If it is not their job to manage deer populations why is it not open season 24/7 365? Isn't it the DNR's responsibility to manage the deer herd. i would say you are wrong BT."
Well, first - it is the job of the WDNR to manage the deer heard.
Secondly, because I answered your first question, the second simply does not apply!
Thirdly, Yes it is.
And lastly - What am I wrong about?
Thanks!
RutNStrut sez:
"Yup, then we can hear how they don't want or need the input of barstool biologists. It can't work both ways. Yup, then we can hear how they don't want or need the input of barstool biologists. It can't work both ways. The DNR wants what they say treated as gospel. But when their gospel flops. Then the barstool biologists should determine how many deer should be shot in their area. . But when their gospel flops. Then the barstool biologists should determine how many deer should be shot in their area."
When was the last time you heard an official from the WDNR use the terminology "barstool biologists"?
You say . "The DNR wants what they say treated as gospel." Really? I cannot remember anyone from the WDNR make that statement either or even imply that? Hmmmm...
When the WDNR makes a "good faith effort" to start to interject the hunters opinions in specific areas, some go to pieces.
The reason we "cant have it both ways" is because people wont allow for it- that WONT allow for some partnership between the WDNR officials and the regular Joe hunter.
For years people have been screaming - DAMN DNR - NEVER listen to us hunters!!!!
Well, now they are! Embrace the moment!
If your looking for the "perfect" plan - brace yourself! Because like so much in life - nothing is perfect!! BUT, it's a good (GREAT) step in the right direction.
