New Bear Management plan
Wisconsin
Wisconsin DNR staff will be answering questions and accepting public input on a revision to Wisconsin's black bear management plan. This revised plan will outline objectives and strategies to guide black bear management in the state from 2019 – 2029. Beginning March 25, the plan will be available for public comment on the DNR website. The comment period will remain open through April 14.
DNR staff will present the plan at six informational sessions around the state. Each meeting will run from 7-9 p.m. – dates and locations are as follows:
Monday, March 25, Waukesha - Room 101, Commons Building, UW Milwaukee-Waukesha, 1500 N University Dr.;
Tuesday, March 26, Richland Center - Pippin Room, Melvill Hall, UW Platteville-Richland, 1200 Hwy. 14W;
Wednesday, March 27, Black River Falls - Great Room, Lunda Community Center, 405 Hwy 54 W;
Monday, April 1, Rice Lake - 236 Ritzinger Hall, UW Eau Claire-Barron County, 1800 College Dr.;
Tuesday, April 2, Wausau - Room 180 Main Building, UW Stevens Point- Wausau, 518 S 7th Ave.;
Wednesday, April 3, Woodruff - Woodruff Community Center, 1418 1st Ave.
Even if you are unable to attend one of the in-person public information sessions, you can submit feedback beginning March 25 on the DNR website.
I have sent them the same message many times . Sell OTC Bear tags . When the kill hits 30,000 the hunt stops EXCEPT for outfitters that have booked hunts .
Nothing about that suggestion makes any sense to me. For the most part I am happy with the new recommendations. A few will get significant debate I am sure.
For 40 bucks any resident can get a guide license. So excluding 'booked' hunts isn't going to work so well.
“revised plan will outline objectives and strategies to guide black bear management in the state from 2019 –2029.” A Ten year plan that’s a good length of time.
What the changes / suggestion that are on the table? I heard one was splitting zone C into few zones .
Baiters without dogs would get run over in unit C by dog hunters. It is a unit that dog hunting does not work well to begin with. I suggest removing dogs from unit C for hunting and training.
Zone C will be split up. Part will now be D. Others will be new. Portions of the current C will allow hounds.
There is lots of room in the Clark County Forest area. I used to train over there.
I find it interesting the majority of the meeting places are in areas with the least amount of bear population and guides. The Northern 1/4 of the state is totally eliminated. The RUMOR mill and I repeat RUMOR mill has it that the Wis.Bear Dog Asso. is supporting changes. These changes will help them and hurt sitters. For supporting changes it is rumored the state will tender support for a law change to allow dog runners to cross private lands to retrieve their dogs without permission from the land owners. Among other benefits.
Its sad that the state will give Foxcon majors tax cuts but then turns around and tries to hammer guides ( very small business persons ) with major fee increases.
Lets see if the plans calls for sitters to get the first 5 days every year. Doudt it . Dog runners get 2 full months to run now before season. Letting the sitters go first would eliminate ALOT of problems.
Nothing against dog hunters, but, if they allow running dogs in area C, I will not even try getting a tag for there. It's hard enough dealing with too many baiters let alone dog hunters.
Most hound hunters support letting bait sitters going first. There will never be a law that allows an individual to go on private land without landowner permission for any reason.
Just received a call that there is a WCFA meeting in Marshfield 2day . The Wdnr will be giving an outline of the proposed BMP to them. Hopefully I will be able to kill or support the rumors.
Skook,, The Wis. Bear dog Asso. is not and have fought it. The fight starts and ends with them. As far as private lands and dogs,,,, in our liberal state I won't bet the house on anything.
I have heard that the new area 'C', still predominently private land, will be open to hound hunting per the proposal. (Bear Committee Minutes) If I were a landowner in area 'C', even one that does not bear hunt, I would be unhappy with hounds running in my area or on my land. Dogs will drive bear, but they will drive off deer as well. The hound men can be ticketed, but you'll have to catch them 'red handed' AND HAVE A District Attorney willing to prosecute. I do not think hound and hunter trespassing will do ANY type of hunters any favors with the non-hunting land owner. That part of the proposal is a bad idea. Getting permission to hunt private land can be difficult as it is. In other states, trespassing along with the harvesting of an animal is considered poaching.
There is already a major issue in our area with coon hunters and their dogs not knowing property lines. We will be at meetings and writing letters of opposition as zone c landowners.
Screwball +1. Too much private property. Been voted down at CC Meetings before. Like normal IM sure our Conservation Congress will do NOTHING.
The Conservation Congress' role in this process was to be part of the stakeholder group that developed the plan. The rest is up to the public and the NRB.
Worse than a bunch of old women. LOL
Just like crossbows whoever gives the most backroom political handjobs will come out on top of this. My guess is that the WI Bear hunters association have been working on their "technique".
There is a Zone D already, I proposed several years ago to split Zone C at around Highway 10 and have the southern Zone OTC tags since that area is mainly out of the historic bear range and they have a huge negative impact on agriculture if they get established in an area.
I've also promoted statewide OTC with a set quota and the elimination of baiting. You could lower the license cost and have a quality hunt any year you wanted, instead of waiting 13 years to draw a tag and end up with a family or some other emergency pop up and never get to use your tag and have to wait another 13 years. Everyone that was really interested would become a very good bear hunter by reading sign and bear habitat and could do pretty well for themselves.
RutnStrut ....your right. If the CC supports this crap they are even more worthless than I thought.
Part of zone C will be in zone D now. The current zone C will be split up.
As I said before, Congress has nothing? to do with the process moving forward.
Here is my simple solution,,, want a bear point, want a tag,, You can not apply unless you hold a valid hunting license,,,PERIOD,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, that way all the other nonsense goes away....
Will it ever happen? NO
"Congress has nothing? to do with the process moving forward."
Political, is just a term used. It covers brown nosing, dirty underhanded back room deals. There doesn't need to be actual politicians involved. Bureaucratic pencil pushers are pretty much the same as politicians.
It was brought up before at conservation meetings. VOTED DOWN EVERY TIME. Was any one group involved in bringing this up again ?????? If the CC is not involved in this THEY SHOULD BE. I got a idea that would be fair ask all private landowners in zone c if they are for this .
The CC has no power to do anything with this. They are an advisory committee that takes public input and provides it to the NRB and DNR.
It’s up to them, the government, and lobbyists what they do with the information provided.
Wasn't running dogs in C brought up before in CC meetings and voted down??
What was the CC stance as mentioned they sat on the advisory that crafted this plan?
What is the break up of permits each year, what percentage are allocated to resident? What percentage to nonresidents?
DT is this plan going to be on spring hearings this year??????
As stated in the original post, this is a plan developed by a stakeholder group and will be up for public review before it goes to the NRB. No it won't be on the spring hearing questionnaire. Totally different process.
Groundhunter - Minnesota requires that if your selected that you purchase your license by a certain date. If not, the tag goes into a lottery held before season for that respective area.
Great idea!!
Wisconsin...you don't have to buy a tag till you decide to hunt. The way it's set now...no bear hitting..no need to buy your tag...OR,
The local "Anti-Hunters" can win a tag and just sit on it and its' never used.....
DIYElk
There is no separation of tags for residents and nonresidents. If you have the amount of points needed you will draw a tag resident or not.
The Wdnr gave a VERY brief summary of the proposed BMP at the WCFA meeting in Marshfield yesterday. Basically they are redoing the plan because it hasn't been done since 1980. ( justifying jobs )?? The wdnr is looking at combining and splitting zones. They admit that past estimates of the bear population has been flawed from 10,000 to what they now believe to be 30,000. They are concerned the population is above carrying goals of the state, ( Hmmmmm were have we heard that before )!! The wdnr is looking put limitations on baiting because they believe it maybe artificially over inflating the population. I find that very interesting since the wdnr reduced the tags in zone A by 25%. How does that figure in the over population and then combine zones...
A summary of the bear plan was released; yet people are supposed to write commentary on it? For a ten year plan?? There should be a link to the current full draft somewhere.
DNR sent me a e mail with picture of a bear with dates of meetings. No out line of proposal.
Judging by the massive number of Wisconsin plates I see parked on just about every logging road north of Duluth during bear season I would think you cheddar heads would find immense favor in adopting Minnesota's management style...gotta be something you guys like about it here that keep you coming in droves every fall!
The original post said that the proposal will be available for public comment on the 25th. They are telling people about it in advance so they know it's coming and don't miss it. People are up in arms over something they haven't even read and have the opportunity to recommend changes to.
I was told by someone, maybe even posted here that the area proposed for allowing dogs as part of this change is mostly 2 large chunks of public land that are currently part of zone C. Thinking the blue hills area was one of them.
skookumjt is the bear hunters association involved in this at all ??
Again, since the CC was on the advisory committee, did they object to allowing dogs to run in C? I would think that they would have, seeing as in their spring hearings it has been voted down. Drop Tine or Skook, could you please share! Thank you
Found out the bear hunters association is involved with great members of our CC.
Southfarm, we Packers have to give you Vikings something to look forward to every year!! It's kind of a charity thing we give you for the licence sales and something to get excited about when we block your logging roads, LOL.
No worries, I'm an old cheddar head myself...and all my bear hunts are water-based operations so you can block all the logging roads you want.
The WBHA had a representative in the group as did the WCC. I don't remember how many stakeholders were involved but they should be listed in the recommendation.
Hound hunting is already allowed in the Blue Hills.
The portions of the current zone C that are proposed to have hound hunting are the larger chunks of public land in Taylor County and Jackson County.
The last version I saw was roughly 60 pages. There's a lot there.
"Wasn't running dogs in C brought up before in CC meetings and voted down??"
What is brought up before the CC and voted on doesn't really matter. The CC is a lot like CDAC. Just a feel good thing to make people think what they say or do is being taken into consideration. Perfect example is crossbows and how they were voted down more than once. Yet here they are...
The Congress did oppose crossbows, as did pretty much every other group. The Legislature didn't care and followed their pocketbooks.
Apparently my bad on the blue hills, dang memory ain't always on my side anymore .
skookumjt how many CC delegates are members of the bear hunters association. That organization knows if brought up at CC meetings it would be voted down.
Buck wrote
“Found out the bear hunters association is involved with great members of our CC”
Why wouldn’t the WBHA not be involved? It’s about increasing opportunities for its members and Bear hunters. Also why wouldn’t the CC as an advisory council not be involved? They do have Big Game and Bear committees.
This is nothing new. As things change the DNR updates management plans all the time. The most recent was the Wolf. Part of our setback to the wolf season was the lack of a modern updated Management plan for them. I guarantee the DNR does now. It’s very important to have these with the constant court battles. Large carnivores and hunting are always at the forefront.
Just look at Patricia Randolf and RAVEN also Rod Corranodo and the wolf Patrol that are active in our State not to mention all the non direct pressures from HSUS and PETA.
Many of you are all guessing what’s going to be proposed and got your panties in a wad prematurely. It’s a shame the WBH doesn’t work with other groups instead of alienating itself from them.
DT - Stop the WBH bashing. The hound hunters have this Bear Committee stacked with their members. The WBH had one vote on the committee. Bear bait licensees are in the minority despite providing much of the funding through license purchases and application fees. So somehow they are not to have a voice? Is that what you are saying? Evidently, the houndsmen think so. No accomodations were made.
DT are you a member of the bear hunters association??? Do you go to their banquets???
The reality is that the Bear Hunters only work with groups that bow to them. As an organization should do, they push their agenda. But they quickest to say to hell with any others. They clearly exhibited this during the crossbow discussions. Their leaders are backstabber’s and should not be trusted. That is my experience with them. WBA fights for their cause also but are more gentlemanly about it. That works to their detriment.
Myke
Can you substantiate that claim? I was on the Bear Committee so I have a idea of the makeup of the members. But then again I'll say it. The CC and it’s committees are advisory only and have no power to create policy or regulations.
Buck, I’m not a member and haven’t been for several years. I go to the convention once in a while if I need collars and leads. Also to see the new tech stuff. If I’m a member or not I’m not sure what it has to do with anything?
DT how many pro hound hunters were on this committee besides you?????
I would say most were pro bear hunting. Hounds and baiting it didn’t matter. I personally knew of two that ran hounds besides myself that were on the committee. Why would someone interested in fishing get on a bear committee? Most committees are filled by the delegates that have interest in that committee. I have also been on the Fur and Wolf committies over the years.
The last committe I was on was the Migratory committee so someone else could sit in on the bear committee. You have to remember the committies are there representing the public’s interest in resolutions they submit. .
Pro hound hunters? Lol. That's a new one. On the bear committee? I would guess easily half. That would make perfect sense. Really wouldn't expect waterfowl guys to be on the bear committee.
"I would say most were pro bear hunting. Hounds and baiting it didn’t matter." Now that's funny sh!t right there now. The truth is The WBA is really the,,,,,,,,,, Wis. Bear Hound Asso.,,,,,,, If they really cared about sitters and trying to eliminate conflict they won't fight the first 5 days for sitters every year. Or running bear (sows and cubs) in the middle of the summer in the hottest months. The President of the Wis. Bear Hound Asso. links archers and sitters together and I've heard his negative comments on both. Remember the Wis. Bear Hound Asso. supported Xguns. They did so in part to gain membership. MONEY !!
DT what would you say if the committee had all bear hunters who only bait bear and they decided to reverse the rule that lets dog runners practice ( no harvest tag) when baiters are hunting.
Buck there are no hounds in the woods the first week when bait sitters go first. Or the last week when they go second. Do you even bear hunt?
Year in and year out bait sitters have a higher success rate than hound hunters no matter who goes first. So tell me why there is a need for bait sitters to go first every year? Sounds like a group of certain bow hunters being selfish again. The WI. success rate was higher than any other state in the lower 48. (the last I looked) so go hunting and have fun.
"So tell me why there is a need for bait sitters to go first every year?" Because the Dog hunters get to go first EVERY year now and have a LONGER season. They start running in July .And if you think there aren't bears being shot during the so called training season I have some ocean front property for sale in Arizona cheap. Sitting doesn't disrupt a dog hunters bait. But running dogs over a sitters bait (May, Can and has) disrupted and ruined a sitters bait.
Drop Tine I shot a bear last season. Here is a shock for you. Im fine just the way it is now. Only thing I would want to ever change is during the season you must have a kill tag to run hounds.
DT - you answered your own question.
The push for private land access effectively without the permission of the landowners is not good policy for anyone hunting in those areas. It is bound to stir up trouble, and is an arrogant suggestion discounting private land rights. It is bad policy, and harmful in the long and short term, thus the pushback. That could open a very large can of worms.
I have a friend who has a cabin up north in bear country. His neighbor called letting him know bear hunters were on his land. They shot and killed a bear on his property near his cabin and road, and left the gut pile. He knows who it was, but did not turn them in because he is afraid that his cabin may get vandalized or worse. Not the first time that I have heard this type of story, and this in areas that have largely public land tracts. How do you think this will fly in areas that are largely private? I like running with the hounds too, but not without permission. You can't control the hounds in that environment, why set things up for failure?
Exactly why we quit running the black and tans after the masked bandits. Couldn't keep them off others land which didn't work so well. I was bow hunting in Mountain on public land and had hounds run right under my tree. Legal yes, but it still kind of ruined the hunt. Walked to the road to find a truck load of dudes with some sort of tv attenna looking things "tracking the hounds". The guy asked if I wanted to track with them and shoot it with my bow. Ahhh no thanks.
One of my big timber spots has plenty of Bears . Many times Bear Dogs would run past me . One evening 4 dogs ran down the trail . 2 stopped to say hi . I gave them a piece of my beef stick & off they went .
20 minures later the Deer came out & started feeding . No big deal .
My only quarrel with bears is how many Fawns they kill .
Personally I dont like dogs running in the woods period. It seems like the easy way out, somewhat like using xguns.
Are dogs permitted to run off leash on state and/or national forests?
Tweed, wisconsin allows dogs to be off leash if actively hunting or training. Almost every year I hear it from someone on the ice age trail about my dogs being off leash, I give them the warden's cell number along with my contact info and tell them to enjoy their day. Dog training is a daily activity, no leashes for me. I'm not a bear hunter but same rules should apply to their hounds id think. Michigan is different, technically even a upland bird dog needs to be leashed. I just learned this recently due to a story about a shed hunting dog getting caught in a conibear trap and suffocating as the owner didn't know how to release it. Trap was set illegally but dog was also off leash. Lots of finger pointing between both sides. Speaking of, you should show me how those traps release just encase I ever end up in that situation
Thanks northbound. I ask specifically because of the conibears out there.
Northbound here ya go. You need to practice this thought to do it quickly. I don’t have any bigger than 160’s or I would let you borrow one to practice it.
Yeah looks like something to practice. Can't visualize how the hell you'd do that while a dog is in it freaking out
Carry a rope with you to compress the springs. That's what I did until I finally got a setter.
I have a dozen 220 that are collecting dust. Even if I set them legally there's too many small dogs around and I'd feel worse than horrible if one get in them.
Ruger1022..... It is big deal when the dogs are on private property .
Buck , I agree . When I owned the farm stray dogs & Bear dogs were an issue .
A few years ago I asked a Warden what his biggest problem was in the fall .He said ," Dogs thay can't read " .
Personally I dont like dogs running in the woods period. It seems like the easy way out, somewhat like using xguns.
While shooting a bear with it's head buried in a box of donuts is difficult. There is nothing difficult with bear hunting in WI unless one chooses to stalk like they do out west and in Alaska.
Happy- I've never hunted bears but running dogs and baiting does not interest me. I've been sending in for pts the last few yrs because we started getting bears on cam. I will probably get a kill tag next yr, I know for sure I wont be using dogs or a xgun. Probably just bowhunt for deer and if one comes through so be it. I dont want to pressure our deer woods with baiting.
Each of my kids have killed a bear with dogs. They were 10 and 13 when they killed them. I killed one 2 years ago with my bow over bait. I only did that hunt to even the score with my kids. Neither kill shot is difficult. Sitting over bait can be boring as hell. I concur that stalking is the only challenge when it comes to bear hunting.
I will say though that being a part of the kills with dogs was damn fun. I was part of a kill where the bear did not tree and it took close to 8 hours to get a shooter in close enough for the kill on a huge bear. The bear ripped open one of the dogs. We travelled many miles chasing that bear and getting him out was a ton of work. On one of the chases with my daughter, we treed 3 cubs and the sow was there making it quite difficult to remove the dogs. I was spent after that. I enjoy participating with my friends who run dogs.
"I will say though that being a part of the kills with dogs was damn fun" A bear can use every sense that it has to detect and avoid a hunter at a bait just to return at night. Now let see the fun with dogs .. GPS collars, Marine Radios, Cell Pones. Beer, 10 0r 12 trucks surrounding a block, Dropping fresh dogs at every crossing, Beer, Mashing gates to get bear out, (both on private and public lands),More Beer, Rigging off private land on someone else bait, Blocking Roads, Dropping more fresh dogs, Splitting the sow from her cubs and then shooting her, arguing with land owners because ( your dogs can't read signs, Dropping more fresh dogs, More Beer, walk the shooter in with the person who really has the tag and shoot it out of a tree while trapped up there from exhaustion with dogs at the base of the tree.. Ya,,, I suuure can see how a bear can use all its senses to escape. Yup Sure can see the fun.. And believe it or not I'm not against dogs just their users ethics.
Funny I’ve been hound hunting 15 plus years and have not experienced any of that.
I’m not saying some of it doesn’t happen. There are bad in all groups. If not cuffs and collars in WON wouldn’t have a full page every issue. Funny thing is it’s rare to see citations issued related to bear hunting in that publication.
I have seen most of what he says from bear hunters but I have seen bear hunters who would not consider doing the illegal/unethical things he mentions. I have also seed deer hunters put a 1000# of corn out. I have seen bowhunters wound several deer every year. I have seen hunters of every type drunk, trespass, break down gates and barriers, litter, waste game, fail to even look for game they shot at, shoot outside of hours, steal stands and cameras. I realize they are the exceptions, not the rule and take corrective action instead of generalizing.
D.T. Reason why you don't see any citations in W.O.N its because mostly its the sheriff that's issuing the tickets and not the DNR.
arrow 1,,,, what an asshole
Why Ground Hunter,, such hurtful words. (: Looks like you got backed in the corner and just can't handle the truth, Your ethics just surfaced. Your words remind me of a 5 year old that can't get his way. Or a liberal democrat mad at Trump for making America GREAT Again after years of foiled Democratic Policies . I forgive you,,, I know its tough to be a Liberal watching us WINNING all the time. I did find a little piece on youtube about you I would like to share, didn't know you liked cheetos. It takes a couple of seconds to load. Again i forgive you ! You just have to accept the truth sometimes and the real world you live in .
Well this jumped the tracks.
It's TRUE that most dog owners are clueless but I say that about parents also and look at where we are now. Lol
arrow,,,,, I ran dogs out of Iron County in Mercer,,,, we were and still are never like that, in fact there is no drinking on our hunts, and dogs are picked up starting about 1pm and we are respectful of other hunters,,,,,,,, you make us sound like a bunch of bubbas,,,,,,, never saw it,,,,,,,, I can not run them now, too hard on me, but we are not as you describe....
you hate dog hunters, we will leave it at that.......................
Obviously ground hunter you didn't read my entire post or alcohol mixed with your emotions . " And believe it or not I'm not against dogs just their users ethics." If your not like that you sure got offensive and I hope your not . But there are a lot of Bubbas running dogs. You have bad apples in every style of hunting. But waiting for a tags for 8 years just to have bubbas group ruin your hunt is hard to take. When you called others names that is the attitude many of us have experienced when someone confronts dog owners about trespassing as one example. And the next thing we hear is " My dogs can't read signs" Even though there is saw dust on the road where they just put fresh dogs out on private land. And when the Sheriff comes they say we started them on public land !! You as a dog runner calling names proves my point. Is the bubba coming out of you? I hope not but it makes one wonder. And again I forgive you. As a conservative I have learned to turn the other cheek from Liberals.
I'll admit it, those guys arrow speaks of sound pretty fun. I personally wouldn't use my bear tag that way but I'd ride along and have some drinks while enjoying the show if invited.
You know why you wait so long for tags? Because everyone can apply for one, with three bucks,,,,,, I was always against that............... No one should be able to apply unless you hold a current hunting license,,,,,, that is my opinion
I think there is a real push in this state to end dog hunting, the antis want that stopped real bad,,,,, In many cases, I will concede, jerk hunters will ruin it for a lot of people......
"In many cases, I will concede, jerk hunters will ruin it for a lot of people......"
AMEN! - and for more than just hound hunting too. We must police ourselves as hunters, or the general public will make sure the door slams shut on hound hunting. Run public land with dogs, fine. But do not allow dogs on areas where ownership is predominantly private; even checkerboard ownership is bad. 'Dogs can't read' excuses are idiotic. It is just asking for trouble. Bait hunters have to ask for permission too. Cell and WiFi trail cams are everywhere and admissible evidence in court. The old days of 'catch me if you can' are over- this is a 10 year plan - the DNR, NRB and the CC should know better. This is a logical restriction for land access and preserving the rights of landowners. Not about bait vs hounds as a hunting method by itself.
Well, other's opinions won't change the factual experiences I had with my son and daughter on their bear hunts with dogs. They were both damn fun especially the long ground fight where the bear was eventually shot at less than 10 feet after an 8+ hour chase. Cool stuff. And, in both of our cases, no private land was crossed and there was zero alcohol from anyone until after the hunts. The generalization that all hound hunters drink while hunting seems pretty idiotic to me.
Now, that said, killing one via dogs was not for me. That is why I chose to kill one as a sitter with my bow. But, shooting a bear with his head buried in a box of donuts is far from invigorating by any stretch of the imagination. To be honest, the kill shots for the kids with the bears high in a tree and moving were far more challenging. So was just getting to the bear and getting the dead ones out. No nice trails to walk. Isn't it great how people have choices?
Myke ... +1. I myself am not against running hounds for bear. I have friends who do run bear and are members of the WBA. I used to buy raffle tickets for their big raffle.... I dont now. WBA is a organization I dont trust. They make agreements then flip after they get what they want. This 10 year plan should not be rushed..... it should go thru the CC but the WBA knows what will happen if their is a vote.
Buck there is two reasons I’m no longer on the CC. The main one was work obligations. The other is the CC is no longer relevant in my opinion with online voting now. Anyone can get a customer number and vote. Tree huggers and sportsmen and women alike.
DT this 10 year plan would have went up in flames no matter when it is brought up. .... just like the dog retrieval proposal.
Hound hunting and running hounds is a blast. However hound hunters as a whole are a different breed that seem to think there are rules, then there are hound hunting rules.
DT I agree with you on line voting for important issues is a mistake,,,,, however I may be wrong, but will wait and see...... Sportsmen are complacent, they think things will never change,,,,, Well I can assure you, the antis are not, and all the leaf lickers and wolf huggers, will be on line, to vote down what they can,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Then the outdoor writers, will write, about the true feelings of people in the state,,,, The CC will matter little after this,,,,,, I liked going to the meeting and such, but days change...... I think the CC will not carry the wishes of the sportsmen in the future,,,,,
We are now having everything run by politics now,,,,,,,, Personally, with politics today, and all the issues,,,,, we have lost our way,,,,,,,, its too bad
Ground Hunter I have said it before, Minnesota has it right.
If you win a tag, you better purchase it by the purchase date or that tag goes back in a lottery that is being held prior to season.
That weeds out anyone NOT serious and provides tags to other hunters that really or can hunt!
I like that idea Bloodtrail. But I would say 3 weeks after notification.
There are good and bad with every sport, but retrieving dogs on private property without the owners permission is dead wrong. I see nothing but problems if this passes. I pay taxes on my property and should have the say who goes on it or not.
To add on to what Bloodtrail mentioned...back a few years it was discovered that anti-hunting groups were getting in on the Minnesota bear lottery to try and take tags away from real hunters (who would potentially kill a bear). By forcing lotto winners to make their tag purchase by a fixed date this puts a financial burden on those groups rather than letting them suck up tags from guys that truly intended to hunt bear. Glad they made that change! Two other changes we made that I feel have improved the quality of the hunt immensely is limiting the number of baits you can put out, and making it illegal to post signs claiming an area, such as "Bear Bait Ahead"...whether you really had one there or not. Unscrupulous individuals would simply drive north country roads and litter the country with their signs hoping to scare everybody else away. We still have to sign our bait, but it has to be at the site, not out on the trail leading in.
I agree with Hoot. I want people to seek permission to get dogs off my land and not have automatic permission to do so. I can't see that law ever passing.
BM69, 3 weeks after notification is not enough time if someone wants to transfer a tag to one of the child wish programs or a wounded vet. People need to line up those hunters first.
Once the tag is issued and or purchased you can transfer the tag at any time up to 15 days before the season starts is how is the system works now.
Went to bear meeting in Waukesha tonight. If this part of plan gets ok they will be able to run hounds in all of C plus.
Are the “new” zones on page 47 of the report? With zone A changing too, what would it mean for the wait time to draw in zone A?
Yes, the proposed new zone boundaries are on page 47 and yes there are significant changes. Parts of the current zone C will become brand new zones and parts of A and C will become part of zone D.
And dogs will be allowed to run bear in counties like Shanawo ,Waupaca, and Portage for starts.
I don’t run dogs and never have hunted behind them, but I do know people that have. In talking to them about hunting behind hounds I don’t think it’s my cup of tea. But I’m not anti hound hunting, and we do have dog runners up by where I hunt in Rusk and have never really had any issues, but that is some large tracks of county forest. In the new area are there huge areas of public? Anyone foresee any issues with private land owners in the area?
It would not be near as bad if they could not practice during season . Run hounds only if they have a kill tag.
Many already apply for tags for every family member including their granny & new borns. Not all. We are also losing a great part of C in the NE corner. East of Crivitz. They put that into Zone B. It is that science thing the DNR keeps talking about. Or maybe that the bear committee has 3 members of the hound assn. including the president & 1 member of WBH. That is the real science. And as I said long ago there is nothing we can do about it except make a lot of noise. Show me the money.
Went to meeting in Waukesha on Monday. DNR Scott Walter did a good job presenting the plan. He also let us know that he was at the WBA Banquet. I mentioned all the private property in zone c and that dog runners can still run during the season without a harvest tag.
To be honest with you, I love the dog hunting,,,,, I worked in a camp for several weeks, and shot a bear in 2008 with the dogs. For me it was one of the most physical hunts I had done, but it was really the gang I was with, top quality young guys, with great dogs and the love of the chase......
With my cabin in the UP, I see a lot of dog traffic, over the Brule, on the Wisconsin side. There are a lot of dog runners in that area, and the only complaint I hear from other hunters, is that the training season is too long.
Well they are organized, and got what they want. However there like in all facets of life, are some real boobs, who trespass and do not care, etc. Big areas are harder to come by, as the years go by....
When I had a camp in C zone, it was on the Sherwood Rd, and there would be a lot of room west of 73, to run dogs in that Clark County Forest area, that is some big areas, but it use to have a lot of wolves,,,,,,,,
I hope the tradition can continue, but it is getting harder and harder, for big enough areas to do so,,,,,,,,,,,
As long as others are legal and ethical, I support all forms of hunting,,,,,
List of the stakeholders who developed the plan: - Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission - Safari Club International - United States Forest Service - USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services - Wisconsin Bear Hunters’ Association - Wisconsin Bowhunters Association - Wisconsin Conservation Congress - Wisconsin County Forest Association - Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation - Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition - Wisconsin Wildlife Federation - WDNR Bureau of Customer & Outreach Services - WDNR Bureau of Law Enforcement - WDNR Bureau of Wildlife Management - WDNR Office of Applied Science
skookumjt ..... How many individuals in each organization are members of the WBA??? Why dont we move this plan to the CC meetings in the spring. Oh by the way were there any additions added on later ??? ground hunter I let some hound hunters practice in summer and they run coyotes in winter. Not against hound hunting. There is too much private property in C. Do most non bear hunters realize that by having this go thru you will have some hound hunters practicing during the bow season.
It's an 87 page document and I have spent way too much time trying to figure out why or how they can even think about running dogs in Waupaca County. I know there are tracts of land big enough to run dogs in Portage and Marathin county. I also don't believe that the bear population in these counties can sustain dog hunting. It is obvious that certain members of this committee have it out for private property owners and a real urge to get their dogs into "new areas" of the state at all costs. The lack of public input in this report is unbelievable. No property owner should have to put up with bear, coon, bird, coyote or any dogs that are not their private property. Absentee landowners will have no control over who has access to their property. There is no way of honestly saying that their dogs were running bears across your property and there is no way to keep them out.
As far as the wait time for tags, anyone's guess is as good as the next guy. I didn't see any proposed numbers in the report and we all know that they don't set the quota's until after the application deadline has passed.
There are too many unanswered questions for me to say I am in favor of any of this plan. I do think that it is one of the most unthought of bear management plan that I can ever remember. I say this because they obviously didn't take into consideration the lack of property big enough to not have conflicts between private land owners and hunters using dogs. It would really be nice to see a map with the proposed zones along with the open public hunting properties in the new dog zones.
It doesn't fall under the Conservation Congress' role. All of the management plans (including forestry, fishing, invasives, etc.) are mandated to be done with stakeholder groups and led by DNR then approved by the NRB.
skookumjt.... I ll ask again how many on that group are members of the WBA??? Was there anything added last minute to the plan.
If anyone wants the proposal send me an email at
[email protected]
buckmaster69 - I believe there are at least 2 members of the WBA on the committee. Someone in Madison should be able to get us a list and then you can request a list from the WBA...Not that they will supply you that information.
Buck bear hunting ends mid Oct. the only dogs in the woods after that are bird hunters.
Looking at the stake holder groups I’m sure all are fairly represented. Each group has one voice no matter how many members are there representing the group from my past experience.
Here is the list of people with ties to the WBA- Carl Schoettel - President Lucas Withrow - Vice President Mike Rogers Joe Koback Here is the list of Committee members in attendance at the meeting in November - Scott Walter – DNR – Chair Monty Brink – Oconto Co (WCFA) Greg Kessler – DNR Miles Falck – GLIFWC Jed Hopp – DNR Nathan Roberts – DNR Michele Woodford – DNR Brad Koele – DNR Ralph Fritsch – WWF Mike Robers – Agriculture Brian Dhuey – DNR Michael Rogers – WI. Conservation Congress Linda Olver – DNR Dan Eklund – USDA – FS – CNNF Richard Kirchmeyer – WI Bowhunters Association Lucas Withrow – Vice President WBHA “Illegible Name” – WBHA Nancy Frost – DNR John Huff – DNR Dave Halfmann – DNR NED Are all the stake holder groups fairly represented??
I see no representation from any private landowner group that will be affected by dogs running through their woods during early archery and grouse season....
I think you all know what to do. This is still the United States of America and our voices still count for something. We all know that hound hunters will get out in force and push to get this through. If you are against this and a private landowner in the new zone go voice your thoughts.
It might be somewhere in this thread, but where do we go/who do we call to provide feedback?
Dont worry Mike the dogs running thru your property are chasing bear.... Wont bother deer at all. If you believe that line of BS
In a statement above the names of committee members in attendance at a November meeting are listed. Part of the list reads, "...Wisconsin Bowhunters Association Lucas Withrow..."
The implication that Mr. Withrow represented the WBH at this meeting is incorrect. He definitely did not! He does not speak for the WBH, he is not even a member of the WBH!
Further, the WBH opposes the plan as it is written at this time. Specifically, the WBH opposes the provision of the plan that expands hound hunting for bears in the southern zone C.
Of course WBH does. They oppose anything not related to bow hunting. As a personal opinion the unwillingness of the WBH to work with other user groups is going to bite them in the arse one day. It’s not if, but when they need the support from the other groups one day do you think those groups will rise up and support WBH? Or will they turn their backs because of exclusionary practices of WBH?
As a hound hunter I can honestly say that just because we can. Doesn’t mean we will. There is only a few areas in C that have enough of a bear population that I would even consider running hounds in. Hound hunters don’t put all their eggs in one basket and hunt one specific bear much like bait sitters do. They play the numbers and tend to run where Bear population numbers support multiple bait hits and opportunities to run the hounds.
Actually I would argue, bear hunting is related bowhunting. WBH is representing not only archery deer hunters but also archery bear bait sitters with their objection. Bear hunters association has stuck their noses into deer hunting before, maybe it is payback.
FYI - WI Bear Bowhunting Trivia -
1942 - Use of bow & arrow allowed for first time to hunt bear. Limit = one bear per year.
1944 - First bear to be taken in the "Modern Era" of archery in Wisconsin taken in 1944 by WBH member & Municipal Judge S. J. Auringer of Grantsburg. The bear is reported to have weighed about 160 pounds and to have been taken in Burnett County.
1945 - Bear season continues. No bag limit.
1954 - One bear per year bag limit reinstated.
There will be six public information sessions (topic list available here) as well as an electronic comment tool beginning March 25. If you would like to provide comments on the 2019 – 2029 Wisconsin Black Bear Management Plan, please submit them to
[email protected] by midnight on Sunday, April 14.
FYI-that is an email address to send comments to that grape posted.
[email protected] This is the email address to voice your concerns. Skook is right. I probably didn't explain it well enough. That is indeed an email address to send comments to on the proposed Bear Management proposals. If you copy and paste that email address, you then can offer your comments on the new proposal. It is very easy, and you will receive an email back stating that they have received your comments. There have been a lot of comments in this thread on the new proposal. Here is an easy way to voice your opinions before the April 14 deadline.
casekiska thank you for the info. and interesting trivia.
DT wrote ...Of course WBH does. They oppose anything not related to bow hunting. Your right thats why they are not fans of crossbows !!!!
DT wrote ...Of course WBH does. They oppose anything not related to bow hunting. Your right thats why they are not fans of crossbows !!!! And they shouldn't Xguns is Not Archery !!!! Thank You WBH. !!!
And here we go....... I’m out!
A quick glance at that list of Bear Hunter personnel reveals a president and a Vice President who are shifty, lying characters. Enough for me to keep my distance from that organization.
CaptMike..... have friends that belong to that group. I quit buying their raffle tickets when I realized that when they make agreements then brake them after they get what they want. They got to practice running hounds during hunting season without a harvest tag. Boy... thats real fair to the baiter who waited 8 plus years for a tag. . They tried to push dog retrieval rule at spring hearings. Made a speech how this would help the guy who's dog wanders unto private property and you could go get without asking permission. They got caught on that one. Now they are trying to sneak getting to run hounds in C during the hunting season. They know if it goes to the CC meetings it will fail big time. When you ask this fine group how many stakeholders are members of the WBA or run hounds they get tongue tied and lie. skook answers half are hound hunters. so that means at least 3/4 of them are. I dont trust this organization at ALL.
Buck, I believe them to be a majority of hound hunters. I have never ran into a worse group of hunters that will throw other hunting groups to the wolves in an effort to achieve their end. In national politics, they would compare very much to the Clinton’s.
"Dont worry Mike the dogs running thru your property are chasing bear.... Wont bother deer at all. If you believe that line of BS "
That could be a good thing if some of those deer get chased around a bit maybe they'll get chased into areas where people will harvest them and off the private lands where landowners plant food plots to hoard them and then complain that they have too many. I've read countless posts on this forum where some of these deer hoarding food plotting landowners keep complaining that there are too many deer on their lands. This change could help spread out the deer a bit more and give others a chance to harvest some of them and help reduce the population in turn saving some trees which the tree humpers should like too. Sounds like a win win situation to me.
Could tell you horror stories from over the years
MF make sure you let the DNR know when you post your comments
How many of you guys went to bear meeting proposals ????
Hey guys dont forget to get your comments in before Sunday.
Thank you Marathon county for writing a resolution on running hounds for bear in zone C during the hunting season !!!!
FYI - Here is a link to the final Bear Management Plan as it will be presented at the May 21-22 NRB meeting. (As of today - 5-17-2019). This link is from the NRB meeting agenda page.
https://dnr.wi.gov/About/NRB/2019/May/2019-05-2B10%20approval%202019-2029%20Bear%20Management%20Plan.pdf
Great NRB meeting today. Thanks again Marathon county for submitting your question on zone c hound running for bear.
The NRB got it right on bear management plan. No running hounds for bear in zone c during the during the hunting season.
Bump, trying to get rid of the crossbow threads
