Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
01-07-2002, 08:46 PM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sussex WI
Posts: 381
Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
Okay, someone explain the WDNR and their language to me! As the title indicates, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, but again you have to question the credibility of guys like Bill Mytton when they say stuff like this (from the Wisconsin Outdoor News, Dec. 31 - Jan 13, 2002):
<font size=6>'Brown blamed for low whitetail kill</font id=size6>
By tim Eisele
Madison - Bill Mytton, DNR deer ecologist, said "it" has happened before.
"During each of the 'brown' years of 1960, 1990 and this past deer season, we got a lot of calls and letters telling us there are no deer out there," Mytton told the Natural Resources Board at its December meeting in Madison.
Those years had no snow on the ground during the gun deer season. Mytton said he now felt like he was in Afganistan, because of the amount of "scud missiles" (in the form of hunter complaints) that were coming at him. Yet, he told the board taht when looking at all 2001 deer seasons together, the harvest may be adequate, and raks fairly well with previous years.
Preliminary registrations, which won't be final until March 2002, totalled 291,563 deer during the nine-day gun season (compared to 433,511 in 2000).
Okay, let's stop there for a second. Mytton says that he hears this after seasons when it is unseasonably warm and there is no snow cover. One of the years he cites is 1990. So imagine my suprise when I went back and did a little checking of the harvest records. In 1990, there were a total of 350,040 deer harvested during the gun season. Folks, not only did that blow the snot out of what we had for a total this year (by 20-some percent!), but it was also a record harvest at that time!! So what am I missing?? If that was indeed a 'brown' year, how did we set a record for harvest during gun season?
But wait, there's more...later in the article...
Mytton said that following the 1960 and 1990 seasons the DNR became too conservative in deer quotas, because of hunter concerns over not seeing deer. He said it took years to recover from inadequate harvests following 'brown' seasons.
....so I do a little more research, and what do I find? The 1991 harvest...you know when the DNR was getting too "conservative"?...ANOTHER RECORD !! That's right! 352,520 taken that year during gun season, not to mention a jump of about 18,000 more taken during bow season that same year.
...and the DNR wonders why they have a credibility problem?
Do we actually pay this guy?
<font size=6>'Brown blamed for low whitetail kill</font id=size6>
By tim Eisele
Madison - Bill Mytton, DNR deer ecologist, said "it" has happened before.
"During each of the 'brown' years of 1960, 1990 and this past deer season, we got a lot of calls and letters telling us there are no deer out there," Mytton told the Natural Resources Board at its December meeting in Madison.
Those years had no snow on the ground during the gun deer season. Mytton said he now felt like he was in Afganistan, because of the amount of "scud missiles" (in the form of hunter complaints) that were coming at him. Yet, he told the board taht when looking at all 2001 deer seasons together, the harvest may be adequate, and raks fairly well with previous years.
Preliminary registrations, which won't be final until March 2002, totalled 291,563 deer during the nine-day gun season (compared to 433,511 in 2000).
Okay, let's stop there for a second. Mytton says that he hears this after seasons when it is unseasonably warm and there is no snow cover. One of the years he cites is 1990. So imagine my suprise when I went back and did a little checking of the harvest records. In 1990, there were a total of 350,040 deer harvested during the gun season. Folks, not only did that blow the snot out of what we had for a total this year (by 20-some percent!), but it was also a record harvest at that time!! So what am I missing?? If that was indeed a 'brown' year, how did we set a record for harvest during gun season?
But wait, there's more...later in the article...
Mytton said that following the 1960 and 1990 seasons the DNR became too conservative in deer quotas, because of hunter concerns over not seeing deer. He said it took years to recover from inadequate harvests following 'brown' seasons.
....so I do a little more research, and what do I find? The 1991 harvest...you know when the DNR was getting too "conservative"?...ANOTHER RECORD !! That's right! 352,520 taken that year during gun season, not to mention a jump of about 18,000 more taken during bow season that same year.
...and the DNR wonders why they have a credibility problem?
Do we actually pay this guy?
01-08-2002, 07:48 PM
#4
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sussex WI
Posts: 381
RE: Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
Nick, I don't pretend to have all the answers either. And I will admit that things like baiting, road hunting, lack of access to private land, etc. may have an impact. That's fine, and if they are shown to be scientifically proven to have an impact, then let's address them as necessary. But to be quoted like Mytton was as saying "Oh, it was the lack of snow and the warmth, just like 1990", and then have it found that 1990 was a record year?...
...well, I guess this is what to expect from state employees who aren't held accountable.
...well, I guess this is what to expect from state employees who aren't held accountable.
01-08-2002, 09:15 PM
#5
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: CWD Central, WI.
Posts: 2,062
RE: Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
TJD: Plain and simple, they try to cover their a$$.
Nick: If you have slobs driving down the road shooting deer you should call a warden. I hunt farmland here too. Some neighbors do drives some don't. Personally I don't see the point in pushing horns that I've passed on for a couple years into the neighbors land with their "brown is down" mentality.
BK: With up to 50% or more of the antlerless harvest being nubbins in some areas (DNR says 25%), what do you think that will do to the ratio?
Sag: <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> You going to the hearing on the 10th? Gonna be standing room only I hear.<img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>
Nick: If you have slobs driving down the road shooting deer you should call a warden. I hunt farmland here too. Some neighbors do drives some don't. Personally I don't see the point in pushing horns that I've passed on for a couple years into the neighbors land with their "brown is down" mentality.
BK: With up to 50% or more of the antlerless harvest being nubbins in some areas (DNR says 25%), what do you think that will do to the ratio?
Sag: <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> You going to the hearing on the 10th? Gonna be standing room only I hear.<img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>
01-09-2002, 06:59 AM
#6
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SE WI USA
Posts: 70
RE: Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
TJD....Please beat your dead horse down wind. <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_dead.gif border=0 align=middle>
nub...no, but I wish you luck against the snomobilers. Leave the dead horse at the door, stick to the important issues, and you guys should be ok. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
nub...no, but I wish you luck against the snomobilers. Leave the dead horse at the door, stick to the important issues, and you guys should be ok. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
01-09-2002, 07:21 AM
#7
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: CWD Central, WI.
Posts: 2,062
RE: Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
Sag: What you think of this? <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Tuesday, January 8, 2002, WDHC met with the Association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs. Both organizations have agreed to oppose the entire Deer 2000 WM40 rule changes at the JCRAR meeting January 10, 2002 in Madison.
The Association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs will meet with their Board of Directors on Sunday, January 13, 2002 to discuss alternatives to the current season framework, including versions of a sixteen day season as suggested by the WDHC.
We welcome the support of snowmobilers in our efforts to help stop t-zones and antlerless hunts in December.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
The Association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs will meet with their Board of Directors on Sunday, January 13, 2002 to discuss alternatives to the current season framework, including versions of a sixteen day season as suggested by the WDHC.
We welcome the support of snowmobilers in our efforts to help stop t-zones and antlerless hunts in December.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
01-09-2002, 08:38 AM
#10
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,540
RE: Not to beat a dead horse...more on the WDNR
Beat, kick stab do what you have must to make yourself feel good but the horse is far from dead.
The "brown seasons" do effect deer harvest. You can't shoot what you can't see. And most hunters can't see deer as well or often with limited snow cover. The reason the harvest was as high as it was in 1990 was because the population was high going into the season. I'd be quessing but I'll bet the kill was a smaller percentage of the herd size than the DNR wanted havested.
Further, the brown season effect does not effect the state equally. There are times that everything north of Hy 8 has a good snow cover and the remaining part,the greater percentage of land, has no snow cover. Agian this is looking at the entire picture not just what you a single but deeply concern individual can see from the limited position.
Man thats some really large font you used there TJD.
The "brown seasons" do effect deer harvest. You can't shoot what you can't see. And most hunters can't see deer as well or often with limited snow cover. The reason the harvest was as high as it was in 1990 was because the population was high going into the season. I'd be quessing but I'll bet the kill was a smaller percentage of the herd size than the DNR wanted havested.
Further, the brown season effect does not effect the state equally. There are times that everything north of Hy 8 has a good snow cover and the remaining part,the greater percentage of land, has no snow cover. Agian this is looking at the entire picture not just what you a single but deeply concern individual can see from the limited position.
Man thats some really large font you used there TJD.