View Single Post
Old 12-12-2008, 10:46 AM
  #77  
TJD
Fork Horn
 
TJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sussex WI
Posts: 381
Default RE: wisconsin DNR CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The one point Handles made is the management or the upper administration will not suffer should funds be cut. While they might not loose their jobs, they could get their duties changed, or perhaps take a job demotion. Or heaven forbid be forced to get off their desk chair and actually have to work the field, they will suffer. They will suffer when hunters, politicians, and most of all the people in general start putting pressure on the DNR as to why things are in our outdoors are getting so bad.
Management and administration will be hurt if enough public and political pressure is brought to bear. Does anyone else recall back in about 1995 or so when the DNR floated the idea of only allowing does to be taken in several DMU's during gun season? The rationale used by the DNR was similar to what we have been hearing...there are too many deer, hunters aren't shooting enough does, blah, blah, blah!!...The outcry from hunters was almost immediate and went all the way to Tommy Thompson. Thompson basically told the DNR to come up with another solution, or else!... Of course, we heard a lot of belly aching from the DNR about how politicians should not interfere with the good work of "professional wildlife management" (whatever that is supposed to mean), but the DNR was forced to relent and the first t-zones were created.

Many still complain that politicians should not interfere with the DNR when it comes to setting policy for deer season. My response is: "Why not?!" Last time I checked, the DNR is a state agency. State agencies are accountable to the state senate, the state assembly, the governor, and ultimately: The People of the State of Wisconsin. That's right...they work for US, they get paid by US, and are ultimately accountable to US. Though it is true that we have state agencies in place to offer a degree of expertise in a field that may not otherwise be available without their help, that expertise, like that available in any other field or discipline, does not mean that they are given license to act as they choose or that they are now accountable to no one. They are ultimately accountable to the people of the state of Wisconsin. If the people who help fund their agency are dissatisfied with their work, then the people, through their elected representatives, should have the right to determine how their mandate to manage wildlife is addressed. Besides, why shouldn't the DNR be more amenable to listening to the concern of hunters? Since the DNR has repeatedly referred to hunters as their "primary wildlife management tool", shouldn't hunters have some input into how the herd is managed? Some argue that this is what the "spring meetings" are about: providing feedback to the DNR. Sure... Have you been to the meetings? Sort of like trying to have your opinions taken seriously by the Soviet Politburo. Is it any wonder why during the "Deer 2000" surveys that only 1/3 of hunters who responded to the survey had a high degree of confidence in the work of the DNR?

If the DNR really wants hunters to take them seriously, they need to start listening. Stop approaching meetings with the conclusions already reached and simply have meetings to go thru the motions because the lesislature told them to. Honestly ask for input from the real stakeholders in the process...hunters and landowners...as to how they would like to see deer managment work. They might be surprised...it certainly would go a long way to build good will from hunters, at least more so than floating ideas like "No buck" gun seasons, or having sharpshooters shoot deer from helicopters at night in the CWD zone.

TJD is offline