I typically hunt north of Ladysmith on private land - and we have had a really lousy season up there so far. By this time, we normally have about seven or eight dear hanging by now. So far, only one doe (mine, taken on Saturday dusk) and two fawns. We've been hearing wolves at night though - thank you so very much, DNR.

Today however was very different ... I came home yesterday (live in Wausau) and decided to go out this morning to some land I own north of town. I wasn't in a big rush, so got to the stand really late (about 830am), figuring that I would just watch the squirrels play. I decided to futz around with a doe bleat call for giggles, and about 10 minutes later, a very nice 7 point buck came along looking for love. One shot through an opening in the saplings with my CZ550FS in 308 (I love that rifle) and I ended up with the biggest buck I have shot ~ 17" spread ... That is very much the exception this year!!!

Since I left the 4-wheeler in Ladysmith, I was in for the uphill drag that would not end ... next time I need to shoot them closer to the truck ...

Slow slow slow.

Not alot of deer seen let alone bucks. I'm in zone 72. They've pretty well thinned the herd by us. Ridge and valley region.

Bow season was the same way.

Snowing now, maybe tomorrow will be different.

DNR said harvest was down 25% from last year and 40 something from the year before that. That's what happens when you kill too many antlerless deer. Too many nubbins shot and a majority of a generation is lost.

Wausau eh? Me too.

I hunted up in Park Falls for the firs 4 days and saw a grand total of ...... 0, zip, nada, nutin' zilch. Not a tail, hair, hide, nuthing.

Never had that happen before in WI. Opening day was the quietest I've ever heard, no matter what state I've hunted. I heard less that a dozen shots total, and only 3 of those were remotely close.

I'm going to try it again near home on Friday-Sunday.

We did get one nice 7pt. A 3.5yo buck, 17" spread. Shot by my wife's uncle. Nice buck, but real short tines. Came out of the Chaumagon near Butternut.

Slow season. The reports I heard on the radio didn't sound that great either.

On the drive home today, I saw very few deer in cars, trucks, or trailers.

I was up by Pittsville... struck out.

Crazy foggy Saturday, got stuck in a stand that wasn't my usual spot. It was right next to a newly cut clear cut.

Sunday, rained hammers and horseshoes until noon. Saw the backs of two moving through the willow bats at about 100 yards. Never got a clear shot. Too thick.

Did have a good time though. Only three other guys at the cabin this year, I was the youngest guy by 25 years. My 1971 Marlin was the newest gun there. We had 1898 Model 94, a Remington #5 rebarreled to 444 Marlin by Munich Arms back in '68[? according to its owner], and an 1873 45-70.

Going down to my spot in Crawford County for the next few days.

Oh I still had fun. Always do. FIL saw a big 8 running near my place this afternoon. When I get home on Friday afternoon, I plan to have him hanging by Sunday...if my FIL doesn't get him first that is.

At least I'll see deer around wausau, or a lot better chance anyway.

I do think the weather played a big role this year, but the DNR says that every year. No doubt there are fewer deer state wide.

Slow, as others said,,I Hunt Mercer for the past 30 years,,Out of 5 Guys I saw the Most deer,,but very early morning
Managed to connect on a Spiker Opening Day at 4:25 P.M.
None of the deer i saw had been swollen or any or hardly fat on them. To darn Warm
Steve

Very poor in Oulu - Maple areas in Bayfield/Douglas counties... Tons of wolf sign & sightings. Quite a few folks are working pretty effectively to fix that problem.

It seems like there are a few areas with a few more deer, but so many areas are nearly void of all sign. Some of the crews that do a lot of driving have quite a few on the pole, but very slow, overall. They still have over 4000 doe permits for sale in unit 2. WTF, over.

It's very doubtful that the WI DNR will get the 300 plus bow and rifle deer license dollars next year, that I've been giving them for so long. It's like giving them a stick to whack you with. No more. Quite a few folks are feeling the same, both resident and non...

I didn't make it up this year; I usually hunt near Bayfield and Minocqua.

Then you didn't miss much. I have a pard that hunts Minocqua area. They haven't seen a deer. Southern Ashland, northern Price, we had 3 deer sightings for 4 guys in 5 days. One buck shot, it was the only one sighted.

Slow here, still wondering about it. Four days on state lands in Tomahawk area. Historically, don't see tons of deer but usually few bucks and by seasons end, more/less guys will fill up. This was my first year up here in about 6yrs. Was eerily quiet.... Saw three yearling does pass thru together, otherwise not a hair between 4 guys. Lotta grouse, fat red squirrels. One probable wolf track. Fair amount of deer sign in places. But for the most part, silence. Was odd. Said to hunting buddy, "It's silent, like right before the cougar or sasquatch attack." LOL. My impression is combination of over-permitted hunting + some contribution each by high bear numbers, wolf predation, and increasing percentage of deer population enjoying life not in the big woods, but in edge habitat of city sprawl.

I'm sure the wolves have something to do with it. But I'm also sure that there are not as many wolves as hunters claim there is.

I believe the real problem is the extra tags that the DNR sells, and the hunters that keep using them. You can't continue to shoot the amount of does and expect to see a ton of deer every year.

I met a guy that shot 4 does on opening morning. He said he kept thinking that "this may be the last one I see this year", so he shot each one. Idiot.

We should all buy extra tags in the units that aren't HCU. That way some other idiot won't shoot nubbins and fawns. Only way that we will be able to cure it.

Guy I work with shot 3 "does" opening morning. 2 nubs and a yearling doe. Then he complains about not seeing any bucks and nobody in the area shot a big buck.

Hmmmm.....1+1=2. Don't live by if it's brown it's down. Idiots.

That's what we do. We all had tags for area 14. None of us had any intention of shooting a doe, after the first day anyway when we saw how few deer there were around, and how few shots we heard.

Not buying a license is another way to get back at the DNR. I'm seriously thinking of that next year.

I live and hunt in unit 41.I have about 10 acres in food plots this year.I only had a 8 point and a spike on camera.Maybe about 4 differnt does.I have about 30 shots of bear.We have Wolves howling nightly.3 of us hunt 80 acres.No one saw a deer opening day.In fact the first deer I saw was Weds. afternoon.A small spike Buck and 2 does came out at 3:00 Pm to eat in a food plot.I have decided to shoot no Does untill the population gets better.I hope the Spike makes it through the season.Next year he could be an 8.At the registration station in Amberg they are over 50% down from last year,which was 30% down from 2007.
I went to the Deer meetings the DNR had around the State in Oct.Our meeting was in Crivitz.The game biologist assured me there would only be a token amount of doe tags for unit forty one.Turns out to be 2,400 tags,last year they had 9,000.When we had hunters choice the most they ever gave out was 900 tags.The DNR is managing the Big Woods thae same as ag areas of the state.They are brain dead.

This year was extremely hit or miss. I did the best out of our group - most didn't see a thing, or if they got something, it was a yearling. It was weird - I had an incredible season while the rest of the guys had a lousy one.

I suspect that it's a combination of a lot of reasons, a lot more wolves, weather, too many bears, too many bambis taken too many years ...

Bears and wolves are prevalent in our area. My grandparents neighbor had a bear in the cornfield opening morning. They saw a different one later the same day.

Everything compounds quickly. "Hopefully" the DNR gets it's crap straight.

We hunt near Amberg also, off of County K. I was the only one of our group of 7 to see a deer in 5 days hunting. I got a fork horn on Opening morning. Our party ate 3 doe tags, not by choice however.

The way I see it, if we don't buy licenses or fill the tags that are being offered, the DNR will only move to more liberal seasons (i.e. proposed 2010 regulations). For whatever reason, they are trying to get the deer herd back to early 1980's levels. I guess that they are doing their own form of QDM, but the way they are doing it is quite a departure from what is read in the popular magazines and books on the subject.

I like to believe that politics haven't entered into many of the decisions that have been made in the past 20 years, but it sure is getting harder and harder to believe that it truely isn't the case.

Also, one other area of deer hunting in Wisconsin that I've noticed much more in the past five years was hit on in a very well written editorial in the January issue of Deer & Deer Hunting Magazine. If you get a chance, you should read it.

I almost forgot.At the meeting the Deer Biologist wanted to blame The Auto Ins. Co.s for all the Doe tags.There was a guy from Marinette there who has an American Family Agency.He told us The Ins. Co.s could care less about the amount of Car Deer accidents.They just adjust the premiums in those locals accordingly.Actually during the late 70`s and throughout the 80`s we almost always filled our Buck tags and they were quality Bucks.I have several rafters full of Horns in my barn.None from the last few years .

I agree, I don't think that the Insurance companies have much to do with it either. Their model is to assess the risk and charge premiums accordingly, just like the agent stated.

We saw very little sign in the areas that we typically hunt the past couple years. I guess that next season we'll have to branch out a little more and get to some places we've looked at on maps, but have never really tried hunting.

Huntz, where abouts do you hunt in DMU 41? We've stayed pretty much in the Town of Amberg and Wausaukee areas. Hunt State and County Forest Land pretty exclusively. May have to start looking into the Town of Silvercliff and Goodman.

On another note, we had some friends that were lucky enough to shoot a 9 and 8 pointer on Opening Day. They had them aged by a DNR biologist at 2.5 years old. The kicker is they were only 100# deer dressed. I shot a 2.5 year old 2 years ago that went 180# dressed. So, not only are there not a lot of deer, but the ones that are there are not getting the greatest nutrition.

Very slow in northern Bayfield County Unit 3. Had two camps of hunters and only 1 of us (not me) saw any deer. Rest of us watched trees grow. Chickadees were pretty though.

I hunt Near Black Sam Rd. Just North of town,east of 141.I hunt right out my backdoor.It is all private land around here.I can`t comment on Deer size as I have not taken one around here in 3 years.If I want meat my Wifes Aunt has a farm near Clintonville .I will probably go there for muzzleloader and take a baldy.

I turkey hunt the Tigerton area, not far from Clintonville. As of this spring, we saw about 10 deer a day, sometimes more. That place has plenty, you should be able to find a baldy to fill your tag.

I hunted in zone 8 for 5 days I shot a cull doe saterday at 4:15 and a guy that was shooting behind me shot a nice 8 point 17 inch spread buck that was chaseing a doe at 4:45 he was just getting ready to unload. After that we didnt see anything but rain and bluejays.

It was very, very slow in unit 2 on the Bois Brule river. Three total in my hunting parts and as of this morning, no bucks have been seen. I saw 3 does and a fawn in a group. The other 2 hunters took a doe a fawn doe. One hunter in our group was hunting this afternoon and tomorrow. The other two of us are done for various reasons. Not much shooting in the general area and fewer hunters than usual too.

I made the almost 400 mile drive today from Superior back home to Milwaukee and only saw 2 deer in vehicles the whole trip. One of the deer was only 10 miles from home. I would guess that I normally see 100+ deer during that drive.

One of my buddies checked and there were still over 2,000 special doe permits available for unit 2 as of Friday. I have no clue how many were already sold. I think we are going to try to find somewhere else to hunt next year. Perhaps the UP.

I hunt in Pepin County near Ella. Our party of 10 or so usually shoot about 12
deer. This year only 4. Not seeing many deer. Lots of standing corn everywhere.
I'm not sure if their all in the corn or just not there at all.

Live in Clintonville and hunt in the Marion, Tigerton, and Big Falls area. Deer numbers aren't like they used to be, but better than further north for sure. One problem this year, LOTS of standing corn. Most farmers always got it off before season started. Not dry enough this year. My son shot a doe on Saturday, I shot a nice 9pt on Sunday so haven't been out since. Will be back out during mz this week. I saw about ten on Saturday. Shot my buck 6:45 Sunday morning. Left after that. Friends/family have been hunting this week. Not seeing too much. Haven't seen a turkey since early bow season. Hope that changes before spring. Tom

Heck, we probably know some of the same guys TTS. I know several guys with camps down there.

We had a pretty good opening day near Amherst as we saw about 50 total between 3 of us and passed 5 small bucks without getting shots and anything big. My father shot 2 does opening morning and I am glad he did. I did not have a good shot at a doe all season only fawns and small bucks. There seem to be a fair number of deer aroung here but not as many as we are used to seeing.
We hunt private land and my father and I will do a lot of small drives which normally produce a few. The majority of the cornfields we hunt are just being taken down now so muzzleloader should be good. I cannot understand why so few people are hunting around here, it seems after opening weekend they just stop and complain. I was reall disapointed to read about the farm bureau lobbying the DNR to shoot more deer.

Sure we do. This year was my 28th year of hunting there. Also worked in the area for close to twenty. Some nice bucks around that area. Keeps getting better every year. Deer that were head turners not too many years ago, barely get a second look now. Deer needs to be in the 150 class to get a "WOW". Also have been hearing rumors that the area might be going to rifle soon. Sick of shotguns myself. Tom

Hope the corn comes off soon too. Next week would be nice. Some cold and snow would be great too. Tom

We hunt in Taylor cty, units 25/26. Our group of 7 saw few deer and managed a spike and 10 pt. I saw 3 white flags.
May switch to Michigan next year, thanks dnr

Forget about blaming wolves and bears (although they certainly are a factor). THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THE DNR and their UNLIMITED ANTLERLESS PERMITS and the IDIOTS THAT FILL THEM!

One guy told me the only deer he saw this season was a doe fawn on Thanksgiving morning. HE SHOT IT!

Keith W. needs to be FIRED!

Bingo. Because the DNR wants them shot is no longer an excuse, sportsman need to start thinking for themselves. All the damn science in the world does little good when reason and pragmatism aren't part of the equation.

Keith Warnke does indeed to go away. Being that the WI DNR is the "model that many states follow", I surely wish someone would take him off of our hands and let him ruin their state's hunting. Second thought, I wouldn't wish the dumb bastard on any of our members that hail from different states.

We have a WINNER!!!!

I talked to a f'n moron at on opener night that shot 4 does. I asked him why, and he said, "Well, I wasn't sure I was going to see another deer, so I shot each one I saw".

If I would have heard him complain about the population, I would have flown off the handle, so I'm glad we left, because I'm sure he would have.

I left Wisconsin 12/04 but I have stayed in touch with my deer hunting friends. And the story is always the same. Every year fewer and fewer deer. Where I used hunt near Mt. Horeb, the land where I hunted would produce 10-12 bucks each year. The past two years, NO deer have even been seen.
I remember the 1st year of the DNR's eradication, a gas station in Barneveld held a contest of who could shoot the most deer. I don't remember the total, but 2 guys at one time were tied a 70-some each. Didn't even have to gut 'em, just deliver them and the DNR would take care of it. Sickening.
I'm in the Black Hills and have enjoyed 5 very good deer seasons and would never even think of moving back to Wisconsin.
By the way, DON'T send any of your DNR guys this way!
V

I think hunter numbers will keep dropping then the DNR will want us to each shoot about 10 apiece. I would sure like to see a 3pt minimum like some states.

I'm not sure that would work very well for two reasons. 1) lots of 1.5yo bucks have 3 points. make a 3pt/side restriction, you may have something.

2) with antler restrictions, people are going to shoot more does, which is the main problem.

Warnke need to go. Plain and simple.

Hunted the entire season in SE Sawyer county. I personlly saw 5 deer including a buck that I couldn't get a shot at. Our group of 5 saw 6 spikes on the opener, one was shot. We had a total of 38 deer sightings for the season and from all we've heard our group saw more than most.

All of us passed up does in hopes it would help rebuild the heard.

The only deer we saw the entire season was does.. We only take one deer/season and we (actually, Adam) didn't take his shot until an hour before the end of the season..

According to a customer I talked to this morning, the people at one registration station south of me had over 65% bucks registered.. Not nearly as many does as last year..

My brother went to the in-laws in Northern WI and they all got skunked. That is the first time I can remember that happening. He has one bro-in-law that is hard-core and spends all day out no matter what the weather. He saw a doe and passed. Nobody else even saw a deer.

Last year they took 5 bucks and one big doe.

This was my season in Oconto county.

Day one- no deer
Day two- 8 pointer 20 minutes before legal shooting had to pass nice buck about 15-17" spread. 3 does 2 fawns and a 2" spike.
Day three- Worked
Day four- Worked
Day five- no deer
Day six- 2 doe, 2 fawn
Day seven- no deer
Day eight- 1 doe
Day nine- no deer

We will give a another try over the weekend with the muzzy.

It it's light enough to see points and spread.....I'm shootin'.

To many pain in the #*% neighbors that would make a call.

No officer, I didn't hear a thing. And we was in the shack making breakfast, grab yourself a plate...cakes are still hot.



or something like that.

Dunn and Pepin counties (Durand area), public land.

I drive back nearly every year to hunt with friends, I grew up in Rock Falls but moved away when I joined the Navy in 1971. We do pretty well each season and I don't ever recall not getting our deer as adults. (We were dumb as stumps when we were young hunters.)

Day 1 - Saturday (2 - hunters - 2 deer down)

We saw three deer, two does and a decent 10 point (152 lbs at the weigh station).

Day 2 - Sunday (2 - hunters, 1 - deer down)

We saw four deer, all does.

Day 3 - Monday (2 - hunters, 0 - deer down)

No deer seen this day (different area and tactics).

Day 4 - Tuesday (2 - hunters, 2 does down)

We saw 6 deer, 2 of which were bucks.

Day 5 - Wednesday (No hunting)

Rain - we butchered deer.

Day 6 - Thursday (No hunting)

(Thanksgiving day - my son flew in from Fort Lewis, WA for hunting and to visit. Venison roast for Thanksgiving.)

Day 7 - Friday (3 hunters - 3 does down)

(We saw 5 deer, all does.)

Day 8 - Saturday (no hunting)

We are done hunting for the season - all deer "orders" are filled.

Day 9 - Sunday (no hunting)

Back to the Minneapolis to drop my son off for the flight back to Fort Lewis.


All told, we saw about 15 does and 3 bucks.
It was nice to be able to use rifles all season instead of switching between shotgun and rifle.
We didn't see as many hunters as usual. There was one party of eight recovering from a "drive" but other than that we saw a few pairs of hunters. We may have come across 10 or 12 hunters while moving about in the woods.
I saw a few nice bucks at the local "big buck" weigh stations (community bars).
Something I thought quite unusual was that I dodn't come across any Hmongs. Usually I see a few groups but this year none. I kind of enjoy meeting and chatting with them about their ethnic cuisine but they were missing this year, sort of a let down.

Well, here's a link to the numbers from this year.

[email:http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/news/pdf/2009_9_day_table.pdf]http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/news/pdf/2009_9_day_table.pdf[/email]

Another report from area 41, between K and Z on Marek Rd. Nine guys opening weekend, five deer seen in total. One forkhorn and one doe on the pole. Mon-saturday four guys hunting, two deer seen, a rather large buck that is still very much alive, and a doe that was running lickity-split away from him.

Been hunting there every year beginning in around 1970. Never have I gone a season without seeing a deer, until this one. (Well, every year that the govt didn't have me in a furin country)

TTS, I heard the same rumor that Waupaca County was going rifle in 2010.

I could handle that. Have my fill of using shotguns. Emailed the DNR earlier this fall concerning that. Was told that the decision to limit us to shotguns wasn't decided upon by the state but by residents in the shotgun areas. Since that was before my time, cannot verify one way or the other, but I have my doubts... DNR has come out publicly stating that shotguns are not any safer than rifles, based on that study that was done out east. He went on to say that to change it, we would have to go through our consevation congress. Whatever that all involves? Tom

Not too sure I want to get into this - but, after seeing the preliminary results of the '09 harvest with their staggering downward numbers ---
Why, in a recent post, were 1 buck and 7 does killed?
You just eliminated the fawn factories! This is probably the basic root of Wisconsin's problems.
V

This is really no suprise, the population as it stands is very near where the over winter goal is required to be by law. This number, 700 to 800k deer hasn't changed since the early 80's (I may be wrong, but all the information that I can find seems to point to this being correct.). If you look at historical harvest numbers, this year ranks right near 1983 & 1984, coincidence?

The next big question is whether or not the DNR will keep to the herd reduction path or one that stabilizes the herd alittle more evenly across the state. I can see where they think that the herd needs to be reduced, afterall habitat has not expanded since the 80's.

I don't want to get into a pi$$ing match, but maybe the DNR has actually done what they have been trying to do for a decade and most people agreed with when this started. Now that we are at what they consider a sustainable population, we have to wait and see how they continue to make regulations.

I got word from Bayfield today. Everyone was skunked except my friend's daughter who got her first deer, a doe. Even his wife who is a deer killing machine didn't get a shot.

1sgLunde

It is a fair question and one that is asked often.

I don't feel that it is my place to manage the deer herd in WI; I leave that to the WI DNR biologists.

The three folks in our hunting party had 16 tags total 3 of which were for antlered.

We shot 50% of the deer the WI DNR authorized us to shoot.

Each deer will be eaten, none go to waste. Four deer were given to folks that could not hunt for themselves due to advanced age or infirmity.

The question of "why shoot does" is not uncommon from hunters. I have been a regular crop damage deer shooter for more than a decade and am asked that question a lot. The answer is, I shoot what is authorized and leave the management to folks that are the experts.

In the area I live the deer eat a percentage of the farmers' crops, some farmers find it difficult to share an ever increasing percentage of their crops with deer. The hunters that hunt the farm land enjoy a large deer herd; it makes for easier hunting and a perceived higher quality of antlers. Many of these hunters (here locally) have no desire to decrease the herd size, the loss the farmers suffer is not of their concern and in fact many will admit if the loss is too great the farmer should fold up and sell but leave the deer alone.

Note also that we hunted public land, exclusively. I saw what I believed to be far fewer hunters this year than in years past; I don't know the reason for this apparent decline.

"I don't know the reason for this apparent decline."

IT IS BECAUSE OF PEOPLE SHOOTING THE DOES. SIMPLE.

We shot 6 bucks and 4 does during gun season. Two are going on the wall and two others were shooters, but not quite wall worthy. One was a little year and half old 5 pt and shot by my little cousin as his first buck. The last was an oops by my uncle.....didn't see the spikes behind the ears.


Here is one I shot opening day with a Browning A-Bolt 7mm WSM and 160gr Accubonds. Complete pass through of both shoulders from about 70 yards. Did the old crappie flop upon getting hit.
I did a rough score and his just gets in the 140's with 9 points and 19.75 inside spread.

I am told that the WI bear population is much higher than originally estimated. Makes me think that the bear population along with the wolves may be responsible for some of the decline in deer. I have nothing against bears, they need to be hunted more though; I have serious doubts about wolves in a state with a healthy people and livestock population.

The issue is they don't manage with biologists...they manage with politics. Plain and simple.

They share the ag tag with friends who want to shoot more deer. I'm sure to an extent there is some crop damage, but not as much as their getting tags for.

You get ag tags....you should become public hunting. That would stop that crap in a hurry. I live in the midddle of farm country, and it is not a big problem because there aren't that many deer.

Preaditors be damned...it's becuase people find the need to fill every doe tag they have. Sure there are wolves, but they kill probably 15-20K deer/year. Not really all that much in the grand scheme of things.

I think a lot of people saw less deer due to the large amount of standing corn this year. I think a lot of deer were in their permanent blind watching us idiots in orange walk past.

Not in the north woods. The only corn that was out, was bought at the feed mill.

Slowest I've seen in a long time.

I'm thinking the DNR's method of counting deer needs to be rethought. I used to see more deer on opening day in the 80's and 90's than I do all season now. I hope I'm a better hunter now than I was when I was in my teens. When they came to the conclusion that black bear numbers were off by 50% a couple of years ago, I'm really having my doubts on the deer count. If they are right now, there were twice as many deer back then. Just my thoughts... Tom

I would have to agree with your comments about the count accuracy. As you mentioned, the bear count is much much higher than they initially predicted. I would have to say that in the case of deer, the situation is the opposite in they predict many more than there are.
It is my opinion that these numbers are skewed those directions intentionally.
I think the general non-hunting urban public has an influence. I think in the state of Wisconsin, people see a lot of deer dead on the road or near roads and view them as a safety hazard and want them managed heavily especially around your urban areas....and the DNR obliges by printing more permits. On the other hand, the general big city public don't see a lot of bears, so they put on their pita shirt and pressure the DNR to limit the permit numbers.

Here is an example:
In LaCrosse a while back, a black bear was spotted which is rare. Then it wandered into the city limits near the zoo where there is a huge kids play area. The police came and the bear treed. They were not able to get a hold of a tranquilizer gun, so they shot and killed it. All sorts of people were pissed about them killing it.....even though if that bear paniced and hurt a kid, they would have been pissed that nothing was done quickly.
On the otherhand, you have urban areas where hunting isn't allowed and the deer numbers grow to an unsustainable level. The DNR pays to have a bunch of deer culled by snipers in a inconspicuous way and noone says a word.

The general non-hunting public don't understand what management really means...and unfortunately they have all of the weight.

Very true. Another thing I have noticed, is the fewer numbers of deer road kills I have been seeing in the past couple of years. Being in a past EAB unit, does and fawns got there heads painted so they couldn't be picked up and registered for the buck sticker. Out of curiosity, asked out insurance agent, who is a good friend, said claims were waaay down from previous years. I'm kind of doubting that the deer have learned to look both ways in the past few years? Tom

The statement quoted is in reference to the decrease in the number of hunters I observed in the woods, not a decrease in the number of deer I observed.

"I saw what I believed to be far fewer hunters this year than in years past; I don't know the reason for this apparent decline.
"

DaveKing -
You don't have to shoot the does just because you have the tags. It appears that MD has a bigger problem with crop damage than WI.
V

If the "they" you are referencing here is me or anyone from my group you are incorrect. I shoot crop damage deer in Maryland, not Wisconsin. I was simply using my experience with farmers and "hunters" here in Maryland as an example.

Shooting crop damage is different than hunting, it is killing. The majority of farmers I know have had very little success with decreasing their deer problem by opening up their land to hunters. It seems the hunters want to husband the deer population rather than shoot the buck factories. Farmers aren't stupid, they know the does must be shot and they will not waste their time with buck shooters.

The "tags" I had were WI issued deer hunting tags.

I shoot deer that are legal for the hunting area. If I had wanted to shoot only bucks I could have done that too but I didn't see one that was big enough to bother killing.

I was not trying to manage the deer population in WI, I was hunting within my legal limit.


Parts of Maryland have a deer problem. It comes from the amount of land locked up as non-hunting and the proximity of crops. The places I shoot crop damage are backed up to parks and urban zones. THE MD DNR has recently begun opening up these parks to hunting but even then the kill is insufficient by the standards used to determine and issue crop damage permits. Hunters are not the answer in many cases, it seems hunters are reluctant to shoot does in sufficient numbers to decrease the population.

The guy isn't doing anything wrong, he's simply going out and enjoying a sport that he loves to partake in. Don't beat him up for doing something legally. You guys are fighting the wrong fight here, this is the kind of stuff the anti's love to see.

That bear in LaCrosse wasn't rare. They are everywhere. Down the road in Sparta they have been sighted in town and I mean downtown for the last 7 years. Damn bears are everywhere.

My grandparents live 4 miles out of town and they had 2 bear sightings on the neighbors property opening day. Numerous cougar sightings this last year.

Now where do you think the deer are. Fertilizer in the form of poop.

I drove today from Stevens Point to Algoma and I was really suprised to see so many car kills near Wausau.

I hunted last night on a 60 acre cornfield that only had the outside 10 rows off and saw at least 4 and shot a doe. There is still so much corn up that the few guys hunting muzzleloader near us are not seeing anything.
The population estimates are definately way off but I find it hard to believe that the DNR will admit that and cut back on the tags. The most important thing I have found near me is that you have to be out hunting instead of complaining like my neighbors who sat 2 mornings and can't believe they didn't fill up with 6 guys.
We hunt a farm where if we do not take any does the farmer will ask for ag tags for damage which he really has.

Nice buck btw....congrats.

No sir, I was refering to the majority of the farmers I know around here that apply for the ag tags... they let their family hunt them only. I know several that get them strictly to keep them away from other hunters, which I don't have a problem with, it is the ones that use every tag they have issued. There are certainly some that need the tags, but nearly as many that don't

Agreed, there is a lot of corn around.

sincere apology Dave. Today I did phone a Laurie Ross, liaison for the DNR Board, WI. She suggested to email her so as to make my comments public record, available to press, etc. Hope that's true anyhow. Below is a c/p of the email I sent:

"Hello Laurie,
This email is a follow-up for the phone conversation we had today. I am a recreational land owner in the northern central portion of Wisconsin. I've owned this land for ten years, the main purpose is for gun deer hunting. I would like to express my disappointment regarding my 2009 deer gun hunt. Not a white tail deer was seen by myself and my brother who hunts with me. Also, the 2007 & 2008 gun hunts were void of deer activity.

One gage I use to judge deer population/activity in my area is the quantity of firearm reports, i.e., gun shots I hear in the surrounding area. I've noted that for the past 5+ years the quantity of gun shot activity has fallen substantially. To me this indicates fewer deer either seen or available.

In particular I was pretty annoyed by the 2008 deer population reports released by the DNR. DNR reports leading up to the gun hunt were presented as good. When harvest results were released, amid "noise" of complaints by hunters afield, DNR states that maybe they screwed up on their population numbers. Also DNR released info regarding the WI black bear population was much greater than projected. The DNR indicated that bear permits would be increased for the 2009 hunt to reduce bear numbers.

What I've concluded is that DNR "science" regarding bear population, deer population, wolf population, is flawed. Or, at least the info presented to the public is.

An additional disappointment I have is with the DNR "desired population goal" regarding the size of the WI deer herd. Never did understand what constitutes a desired pop. goal. Could the desired pop. be what the auto insurance vendors want to minimize car/deer hits? That's one theory I've heard told around the campfire so to speak. I recall when WI deer hunt harvest totals were in the 600,000 range +/-. Then this seeming endless request from the DNR for WI hunters to kill as many female (doe) whitetail as possible. Unlimited bonus tags, earn-a-buck, T-Zone, and so forth. Then the CWD scam to encourage hunters to kill all the deer in the more or less Madison area. Now, let's add the rapid increase of the wolf, bear, coyote predator population. There is now an active wolf pack in my area. DNR wolf map says so. Heard a wolf howl this year too. By the way, both 2007 & 2008 deer hunts, I was visited up close and personal by black bears. 2007 I was able to "yell" the bear off. 2008 yell off did not work. Had to fire gunshot to scare bear away. No bear this year though (relief).

Long and short, I do realize that many factors affect the deer hunt. Here is a list of what I feel contributed specifically for my 2009 deer gun hunt:

1)deer "rut" (breeding) was over. deer were tired, need rest.
2)warm temps, with said rut done, deer took advantage of warm weather to pretty much bed all day.
3)lack of snow, makes seeing deer that were moving difficult.
4)predation by wolfs, bears, coyote, fisher.

bullet #4 I feel is a huge contributing factor to the reduced deer population in my area.

Laurie, I've spent $84 in deer tags for the '07, '08, '09 deer gun hunts. Plus the monies I've spent for food, supplies, and so forth for those hunting years. I saw a news brief on the DNR website a week or three ago saying a 16 day gun hunt is being considered for the 2010 season. Why? I'm not real encouraged to go sit in the woods for 16 days just to see more of nothing.

My current position is that I'll simply not spend the money for the 2010 deer hunt. And encourage as many like minded friends and so forth to boycott the 2010 gun deer hunt as well.

I've attached a PDF document regarding wolf predation. I do believe that the information and data contained is valid. You know, a concern I have is that when the predator population in northern WI finds limited opportunities to feed on wildlife (deer fawns?), where will these find their food source. Common knowledge is that predators will simply relocate to an area that has a food source.

To close: I'd sure like to be told the truth by the DNR regarding deer population numbers. And told of how they were arrived at. The typical press releases issued by the DNR have generally left me having listened to many words that have said nothing. Fluff.

Thank You for your regard,

my sig & contact info was here"

Laurie Ross email addy for any here who wish to contact her.

[email protected]

Very well written and put together.

Thanks for the contact.

I grew up in LaCrosse and have over 20 (not exaggerating) uncles and aunts + my parents that live in LaCrosse county.
None of my family or extended family which includes 7 farms have ever seen a black bear until the last 3 years. Bears weren't around this area until the last, as you say, about 5 years. And as far as LaCrosse city limits, less yet.

They are spreading south as the numbers increase.

I heard on the radio on my way into work this morning.... Sen. Russ Decker told the WI DNR that anybody that has anything to do with deer hunting, needs to be fired.

I don't agree with most things that guy stands for, but that was funny. I do know he is a deer hunter. We live in the same town, and being a politician, he gets around.

I don't know anything about Senator Decker's political views but hearing that, I'd vote for him for Governor! I hope he makes life miserable for those arrogant liars!

Hey WN....Check out the thread in this section calle "Cheese Hunters are Serious, by fluffy.

It has the link to the article there.

And don't be surprised if he runs for Gov. Can't be worse than what we have now.

This was my 50th year of Deer hunting in Forest County. I did kill a decent 9 point, but it has been a long time since I killed the last buck. The silence in the woods up here is deafening. Our last good year was 1995. The winters of 95 and 96 were terrible, and we had 60% mortality in a lot of areas. I don't normally like to feed deer but those years I feed about 60 head at my shack near Hiles. Used alfalfa and potatos. Or herd has NEVER CAME BACK. Wolves, bears and coyotes are a big big problem as well as too damn many doe tags. The root cause of the bear problem is dumping corn in the woods. Deer baiting has ruined deer hunting up here and I suppose everywhere else it been done. I believe corn is the direct cause of the bear population explosion. Years past a sow had 1 or 2 cubs, now they are so fat and healthy they often have 4 and even 5. I had 6 in my back yard last spring. If you don't belive bear kill a lot of fawns, just look up bear and dear predation studies done buy almost every state in the union. I don't know how many bow hunters I have talked to the last few years that rarely see deer but bears are on their baits constantly. How long does it take for the light to come on. Dumping that GD corn in the brush is ruining our deer herd. You also hear the statement made," we have bucks on the trail cams but only at night", there again, how long does it take for the light to come on. QUIT dumping corn on the ground, it makes them nocturnal and they don't have to feed normally. It has brainwashed a generation of (hunters)into thinking that its the only way to kill a deer. IT DON'T WORK. I could rail on about wolves and coyotes, but will end with this. A young guy was bow hunting north of the Pine River Road about a month ago, when 13 wolves came through. If this so called game management in this State don't change their attitudes about these predators and start killing them we may as well sit in the shack and play cribbage. Sometimes I wonder if thats what they want.

I would have really like to see the DNR stop selling all the doe tags once they knew their count was that far off. You can still buy another 800 tags in one unit I hunt.

I think the coyote are taking a lot more fawns than people realize also.

Just a side not but the bear I shot last year dress at 300# and was thought by the game station to be 7 years old which was typical. I just recieved my report back on the tooth and he was only 4. There must be a lot more food availible for them now compared to prior years which they based things on.

As a person who grew up hunting in Wisconsin this is an interesting thread. My, how things have changed. Most of my deer were killed in the sixties and were all bucks. If I recall correctly the last deer I shot in Wisconsin was in the very early seventies and it sticks in my mind the gun kill was somewhere between 70 and 75 thousand then. I don't have a clue as to what the total population was then but I remember seeing 25 or 30 deer a season and I thought that was enough to make the season interesting. Bow-hunting was not real popular, or not anywhere near as popular as it is now. I don't ever remember seeing anyone hunt with a muzzle-loader although I heard some did. Predators were not a real problem, so in short I thought things were pretty cool as a whole.

Fast forward to today's world and things are pretty much the same in all parts of the country. What I mean by this is there is something wrong with the game management pretty much everywhere.

One thing I have observed wherever I have lived in recent years is that the bow-hunters have really gotten the best of both worlds. Their equipment is vastly improved and their seasons are usually the best. In some areas I've been the muzzle-loaders have pretty favorable seasons also and their equipment is also very high tech compared to what I first remember seeing. I have often wondered what would happen if everyone had the same seasons?

One thing I don't like is point restriction rules. They make for a very big pain in the butt where I now live. We have to shoot a three point or better deer, measured on one side, and can only shoot a spike elk. If you can keep away from such a thing in Wisconsin I think it would be the best way.

As for shooting does, there wasn't much of that at all when I hunted in Wisconsin, but it seems that from what I read it is a perfectly acceptable thing now. Can this train of thought be reversed again or has it become to natural a thing to stop now?

$5.00 a point.Interested????Winner can buy Steak and lobster.

It's interesting to hear the grumbling every single year right after the firearm deer season. I found it interesting there were a couple of posts regarding Menominee County, MI. I helped manage that herd for about six years, including managing the deer damage control program. I can also tell you that the area around Crivitz is not the same carrying capacity as most of Menominee County (which is much higher biologically; socially, the farmers are always demanding lower numbers of deer for the most part).

There is a lot that goes in to deer management. The 'deer' management part of it is easy. The way in which the Wisconsin DNR derives population ESTIMATES is sound. Go visit your local biologist in January or February when they have some time and I am sure they would walk through the mathematics utilized in the calculations. But it is important to remember that it is not a 'count'; it is an estimate. Wildlife populations, for the most part, are impossible to 'count', and a count is not necessary for management purposes. What is important is to know what the trends are, i.e., up, down, stable, etc.

Then there are the other parts of deer managment that not many people think about. Go talk to a forester, either County or State forester. They will tell you how difficult it is to regenerate aspen, pine, cedar and many other forest types and species if deer numbers are too high. In bygone days, clearcuts could be made much larger to regenerate aspen and other shade-intolerant forest types. Wildlife managers would actually calculate population estimates for the local area and calculate how big cuts would have to be to 'overwhelm' the deer population in order to get adequate regeneration. Now, with public objection to many types of forest management practices, cuts are pounded by local deer populations and foresters demand reduction of deer numbers to allow regeneration of forest resources.

I never spoke to an insurance agent about reducing deer numbers and never was told to try and reduce numbers specifically to reduce car/deer accidents. Actually, insurance companies MAKE money on car/deer accidents because they raise premiums in high deer population areas. However, it is a consideration and a necessary consideration in the name of public safety. Many states also have it in their natural resource laws that the state agency must manage wildlife numbers to minimize car/deer accidents, minimize negative impact to forest resources, and minimize agricultural and/or horticultural damage.

So, it sounds easy to complain about deer numbers and it might seem simple to just back off 'doe permits', put all kinds of restrictions on hunters, etc. The reality is much more complicated and much more difficult. It is political; but that's not the fault of the DNR biologists and managers. Legislators make laws, not the DNR. Ask most biologists what is the most frustrating part of their job. Most will tell you it's the political parameters they must operate within.

As far as 'doe permit' numbers, it's really a fairly simple process to determine how many permits to issue in an area. After population estimates are calculated, they're compared to the objectives for the unit(s). If the herd is 10% above population objectives the herd needs to be reduces by MORE than 10% (in most cases) to account for fawn production the following spring. All this is done utilizing trends of a certain duration (sometimes 5 year, 10 year, etc...) on success rates. For example, if you decide you need to kill 500 antlerless deer to achieve an objective and your most-recent trend indicates a 50% success rate on antlerless deer, you need to issue 1000 antlerless permits. That part is really quite simple.

So, what can you do? Attend public meetings. Invariably, when I was a wildlife manager, these meetings would be attended by Sierra Club types, anti-hunting types, etc. The only hunters in attendance would be those would wanted to get their individual agenda off their chests. Attend the meeting to LEARN what the issues are; talk to your local biologists, get to know them. Most are really nice people who got into this because they really care about wildlife. Most are hunters, too. They just get tired of getting paid very little for getting bitched at all the time from all directions. They do work for you, though, and most are willing to explain things if you just ask.

Or, you could live in Colorado where I haven't drawn a deer tage in 6 years...

WOW!
I would have never thought I was so naive as to not thought that a WI DNR Biologist would not know all that it takes to arrive at a conclusion that pales all other rumors, heresies that mere Deer hunters in the field actually experience. Oops!
V

Never was a Wisconsin biologist...just know how they do things. I also never discounted hunter's experience, although I did manage properties upon which the 'hunters' placed their blinds in the most convenient places, not necessarily where the deer traveled on their land. I also didn't write my response to start an argument, which is why I included that last paragraph. Go talk to them, don't just complain about it. Have someone come out to your land and make suggestions on how you can improve your hunting. Just some ideas...

That's just the attitude that makes getting anything done that much harder. It's really easy to sit back and criticize, why don't we try to come up with a solution. Lots of problem creators/enablers in America these days, not many problem solvers or creative thinkers anymore. Probably why all the jobs keep get shipped overseas.

Actually I think he aluded to a potential solution.
They need to start actually listening to the guys and gals the go out there wear out boots walking the woods, fields and swamps or get sore rears from spending many hours observing from a tree stand or blind.

Or you chooe to take the approach of the WI DNR and blame the hunters for not being in the woods long enough, too hot, too cold, too much corn in the fields, not enough feed, ect...

God forbid you [bleep] up your ESTIMATES. Nope...that doesn't happen.

Trust me dude....the deer aren't here to be managed. Your buddies screwd the pooch for the last 5 or 6 years, and now it's out of control.

I noticed in the paper this weekend, the DNR was using buck kill numbers instead of overall kill numbers so they didn't look so bad.

That's like laying off 100 well paid employees and 90 go work at wally world for peanuts. Doesn't look so bad. All politics. They'll blame the fewer licenses next to justify the numbers.

Might want to take a look at this; just one of the many issues that wildlife managers have to contend with.

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/special_interests/white_tailed_deer.pdf

I think another part of the issue is that deer numbers in many parts of the country, including Wisconsin, have been so high over that last 10-20 years that hunters got used to seeing many deer each day in the blind and consider that 'normal'. Now that deer numbers are getting more realistic from a long-term sustainability standpoint, hunters aren't seeing nearly as many deer.

I used to do spotlight counts in the early fall and I would have members of local sportsmen's clubs come with me so they could report back to the membership how many deer there actually were out there. Just some other ideas of things people can do to help be a 'squeaky wheel' instead of the anti's. However, the days of wildlife managers and agencies being able to grow deer for hunter satisfaction are just about over...that much is true. It's kind of a bummer, but things will be better long-term.

If say 10 years ago deer pop. was 1.6mil & kill numbers were 645k (be mindful that predator (wolf pack pop) was lower. That was normal.

Now, wolf and bear # substancially higher. Deer pop. lower. Predation of fawns higher, slob hunters using bonus "doe" tags resulted in not only larger doe kill, but nubby bucks mistaken for doe.

See a wolf, or a pack, gut shoot. Least the DNR increased the available bear tags for fall '09 bear.

Why don't we kick each other in the balls a little more? Slob hunters and all. Just because someone goes out and buys a tag that is produced by the DNR and then fills it with an antlerless deer a slob hunter does not make. The name calling and divisive behavior needs to stop or your precious hobby is going to go away. You give an inch, and the anti's take a mile.

Just because a guy fills a doe tag, doesn't make him a slob hunter!

A slob hunter would be a guy on the internet tell others to "gut shoot" a pack of wolves.

yea, ok, point understood. I typed "tags" not singular "tag" guys. IMO too many does have been shot in recient years (and the nubby bucks mistaken for does)and that has reduced the deer numbers. As a responsable hunter, respect for nature and its resources and all that, practicing restraint instead of killing whatever the DNR allows you to kill just makes sense.

I do not like the concept of wolf re-introduction. JMO, if you disagree, ok.

No I don't disagree with the wolf deal. They've been unchecked for over a decade now. They screwed over the bear hunters too, with poor "estimates".

Baiting doesn't help either, I have seen those deer go nocturna. Listen to when you hear the most shots...7:00am and 4:30pm.

Agree 100% that you can't shoot that many does, and not have this problem. Now, I've also got no problem with a guy shooting a doe, but I know a lot of people that fill tags and give away the meat because they can't eat all they have.

What is so irritating to me and others, is the DNR's complete ignoring of the Dear, Wolf, and Coyote predation problem. I have never seen or heard anyone from the Deer game management attribute the terrible shape our deer herd is in to any of these animals. It's always the last cold winter,foggy weather opening weekend, too much corn in the fields, poor fawn survival etc, ad nausem. They are on to something when poor fawn survival is quoted, they just need to take it to the next question. It's as if these predators don't exist and if they do, they don't kill deer. A couple of years ago the Bear count was around 10,000, until they found out it was 30,000 plus. We were told 350 Wolves ws the right number for Wisconsin, last I heard we have over 900, and I believe that is WAY low. Coyotes are thick everywhere.This deer management crew should be fired and and new start made. No Deer season of any kind next year is appropriate. A bounty on bear, wolves and coytes should be instituted. This state,is a state of Deer hunters, our DNR had better wake up and do the right thing.

I'd be pretty surprised if there are 900 wolves in WI. But have no doubt there are more the the 350 that the DNR feels, the state can hold.

I do know there are a ton of coyotes in this area, and they're tough suckers to get when not many let you on their land to hunt them. They are the same guys that complain that there are too many. That is not a shot at you, just the land owners in general.

My post as "Marshrat" (sorry, forgot my password) was an attempt to point out that in the real world of wildlife management, deer are not the only thing that matters. There are not many 'deer managers' anymore, those days are gone. 'Wildlife managers' are concerned with all wildlife, not just deer, and need to be concerned with the long-term implications of over-abundant deer populations on habitat. Populations are not 'over-abundant' according to most deer hunters; heck, deer hunters (including myself) want to see as many deer as possible.

But think of it this way; most of northern Wisconsin, Michigan, etc. are scattered with camp ownerships of 40 acres. Let's just say that three people hunt in each camp and each hunter would consider seeing 10 deer a good day. Let's assume that they probably wouldn't be the same deer, for the most part, since the hunters are on different parts of the property. That's 30 deer sighted per 40, times 16 (640 acres/sq mi) = 480 deer/sq mi. I know I'm simplifying this and there are larger ownerships, etc. But it puts a different spin on what's realistic from a population standpoint. Even a huge population of 80/sq mi would calculate to only 5 seen per hunter, which would be a pretty slow day. Just some more the think about...

It has been more than a few years since the goal of 350 wolves was reached. I think there are easily 900 and even the wolf managers are wanting to thin them back. I was listening to a radio program a while back and they had a lady on who was with Friends of Animals or some title like that. She was not for any wolf killing. How can you call yourself friends of the animals especially wolves when they kill everything, and have no natural enemies except man. If you never want to control the wolf population, that tells me you hate deer, beaver, porcupines etc. I think some people would like to eliminate hunting as a sport because the wolves do all the predation thats needed. What in the hell do we need hunters for if we have wolves. Think about it.

Good point Luke.

Wolves are a big reason why we will probably never have a limited draw Elk hunt in Wi.There is heavy predation on calves by both Bear and Wolf.States like Kentucky who introduced Elk some years after we did have herds that are considerably larger and already have seasons.I personally dont need to see or hear Wolves to experience the Out of Doors.There was a reason to have a Bounty and eliminate them.I hear those SOB`s on almost a nightly occurance.I guess someone getting hurt by one is what it will take to stop this Wolf loving crap.Most likley it will be a Child or older person who cant defend themself.I am not telling anyone to shoot Wolves,but I wont turn anyone who does in either.Anyway its the last Muzzleloading day and I am heading out now.later,Huntz

Deer were moving last night before the storm hit us...I saw a bunch on my way home from work. Well, a bucnh is reletive. I saw about 8. Years past it would have been more like 30-40.

Last eve on the radio it was announced that the DNR Board of Directors meeting was cancled due to the coming storm. Main topic was to have been to 2009 gun deer hunt.

May still be time to email your comments to the BODs liaison:
Laurie Ross email addy for any here who wish to contact her.
laurie.ross@wisconsin.gov
here is a c/p of the email I sent, and she did reply to me too!

"Hello Laurie,
This email is a follow-up for the phone conversation we had today. I am a recreational land owner in the northern central portion of Wisconsin. I've owned this land for ten years, the main purpose is for gun deer hunting. I would like to express my disappointment regarding my 2009 deer gun hunt. Not a white tail deer was seen by myself and my brother who hunts with me. Also, the 2007 & 2008 gun hunts were void of deer activity.

One gage I use to judge deer population/activity in my area is the quantity of firearm reports, i.e., gun shots I hear in the surrounding area. I've noted that for the past 5+ years the quantity of gun shot activity has fallen substantially. To me this indicates fewer deer either seen or available.

In particular I was pretty annoyed by the 2008 deer population reports released by the DNR. DNR reports leading up to the gun hunt were presented as good. When harvest results were released, amid "noise" of complaints by hunters afield, DNR states that maybe they screwed up on their population numbers. Also DNR released info regarding the WI black bear population was much greater than projected. The DNR indicated that bear permits would be increased for the 2009 hunt to reduce bear numbers.

What I've concluded is that DNR "science" regarding bear population, deer population, wolf population, is flawed. Or, at least the info presented to the public is.

An additional disappointment I have is with the DNR "desired population goal" regarding the size of the WI deer herd. Never did understand what constitutes a desired pop. goal. Could the desired pop. be what the auto insurance vendors want to minimize car/deer hits? That's one theory I've heard told around the campfire so to speak. I recall when WI deer hunt harvest totals were in the 600,000 range +/-. Then this seeming endless request from the DNR for WI hunters to kill as many female (doe) whitetail as possible. Unlimited bonus tags, earn-a-buck, T-Zone, and so forth. Then the CWD scam to encourage hunters to kill all the deer in the more or less Madison area. Now, let's add the rapid increase of the wolf, bear, coyote predator population. There is now an active wolf pack in my area. DNR wolf map says so. Heard a wolf howl this year too. By the way, both 2007 & 2008 deer hunts, I was visited up close and personal by black bears. 2007 I was able to "yell" the bear off. 2008 yell off did not work. Had to fire gunshot to scare bear away. No bear this year though (relief).

Long and short, I do realize that many factors affect the deer hunt. Here is a list of what I feel contributed specifically for my 2009 deer gun hunt:

1)deer "rut" (breeding) was over. deer were tired, need rest.
2)warm temps, with said rut done, deer took advantage of warm weather to pretty much bed all day.
3)lack of snow, makes seeing deer that were moving difficult.
4)predation by wolfs, bears, coyote, fisher.

bullet #4 I feel is a huge contributing factor to the reduced deer population in my area.

Laurie, I've spent $84 in deer tags for the '07, '08, '09 deer gun hunts. Plus the monies I've spent for food, supplies, and so forth for those hunting years. I saw a news brief on the DNR website a week or three ago saying a 16 day gun hunt is being considered for the 2010 season. Why? I'm not real encouraged to go sit in the woods for 16 days just to see more of nothing.

My current position is that I'll simply not spend the money for the 2010 deer hunt. And encourage as many like minded friends and so forth to boycott the 2010 gun deer hunt as well.

I've attached a PDF document regarding wolf predation. I do believe that the information and data contained is valid. You know, a concern I have is that when the predator population in northern WI finds limited opportunities to feed on wildlife (deer fawns?), where will these find their food source. Common knowledge is that predators will simply relocate to an area that has a food source.

To close: I'd sure like to be told the truth by the DNR regarding deer population numbers. And told of how they were arrived at. The typical press releases issued by the DNR have generally left me having listened to many words that have said nothing. Fluff.

Thank You for your regard,

my sig & contact info was here"

TooDogs, Excellent letter, I agree 100%.

You guys may have all seen this already.

Pennsylvania is going through the same thing. The game commission took away the 3-day doe season and now allows doe to be taken throughout the entire rifle season not to mention some doe only seasons. Things have been down hill ever since. Now you see guys shooting yearlings the size of my dog, its sick.

We came back from shopping in GreenBay about 3:00 PM.I unloaded the Truck and was just on the Computer when my wife called me to the Living Room.i have about 2 acres of Rye on the other side of my pond and there is 3 Does and a Big Buck munching away.Dang how do they know??????Now I have to hang a tree stand there and try and boink that boy with my Bow.

The problem with your theories and counting of the deer population in most of northern Wisconsin and Michigan, at least in the area that our group hunts is that most of the land is federally and state owned forest land. Over the past two seasons in the woods our camp of three has seen a total of 7 deer. Not very encouraging. And yes we do go into the woods and hunt. Not only that but 3 of the deer were seen and counted as such by all three members of our hunting party. To "assume" that they are different deer on a 40 acre parcel is foolish. Even if you hunt different areas of the 40, deer still travel to eat and sleep.

Doughboy,
Do you have brands on them to confirm they're the same deer? And how is the fact that the land ownership pattern is public land relevent? Hunters hunting on public land don't disperse themselves equally; I am well aware of that. I am also aware that deer do not disperse themselves equally throughout deer range. Better habitat holds higher concentrations of deer and show evidence of higher activity levels.

Theoretically, hunters on public land would all scout to find the best places to hunt. If this were true and all hunters were equally skilled, this would result in most of the hunters being concentrated in the same areas, but this doesn't happen that often either. Hunters tend to space themselves out at least a little bit so it must be that some hunters hunt where concentrations and/or activity centers are greater and some hunt where they are not.

I cannot emphasize this enough though; wildlife managers do not COUNT deer or any other wildlife species that ranges over large areas. They conduct population censuses that give them TRENDS over time. That is what is important. Hunters want to know NUMBERS, exactly, and it is not possible to obtain exact numbers. It is, however, possible to obtain scientifically sound population index numbers that indicate if a population is up, down or stable and by how much.

If I hunted public land and only saw 7 deer I would find a better spot. The assumption piece of my example was just that, an EXAMPLE of what many deer hunters expect and an explanation of why those levels of deer numbers are not possible. I used the example to merely show that IF deer WERE equally distributed throughout a section of land and hunters were equally dispersed and each hunter would be satisfied if they saw 'x' deer, the number of deer required to satisfy those hunters is not sustainable. In other words, it was a best-case scenario.

Part of the issue, too, is how wildlife agencies publish population numbers. In Wisconsin, when many hunters see the deer density maps that say '25 deer/sq.mi' many make the mistaken impression that there are 25 deer in every square mile in that county. This is obviously not true and some parts of the range (that which contains the best habitat) have more deer than others. The deer density per square mile business is a calculation of the estimated deer population for that management unit divided by the deer range is square miles. I think it would be better if agencies just said 'we estimate that there are x,xxx deer in unit z'. What do you think?

What about expanding the concept of Quality Deer Management (QDM) to more of a county wide or regional wide practice that is implemented and governed by the hunters. Around central wisconsin, there are groups of farmers and land owners that install food plots, which consist of more nutritious and beneficial food for the deer than corn, and then they agree to shoot only bucks of a mature age and specific rack size. I know the problem is going to be alot more complex to solve than this but would it be a practicle place to start?

I like that idea, but I think it would be too hard to get all the hunters to comply. Too many people like their meat, and don't care what they shoot. Even if it is better for the herd, and a lot more deer would probably be seen.

Don't forget that QDM dictates heavy antlerless harvests to keep herds well beneath carrying capacity of the range. It seems that is what all the fuss is about!

I am all for food plots and most of those plants are more nutritious than corn. The primary benefit of food plots is that it allows deer to get a jump on their nutritional needs coming out of winter which leads to better fawn production(more 'interest' on the herd) along with maximum body growth for all deer. Antler growth comes after that because antlers are a luxury and nutrition goes to body growth and fawn production first.

I think QDM is a great concept if it is not misconstrued to mean 'trophy buck management' which it too often is. It means quality bucks, does and fawns well within the carrying capacity of the habitat to support them.

Another thing to remember is that the bottleneck for northern deer herds is winter. Research shows that white-tailed deer at the northern edge of their range (N. Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, etc., etc.) slow their metabolism during winter as a survival response to lack of natural food. This is why wildlife agencies argue against winter feeding in yards. Deer simply cannot eat enough to obtain a positive energy balance during this time. The determining factors for northern deer survival during winter is what condition they entered winter in and how long winter lasts. Food plots improve nutritional condition during spring, summer and potentially fall and help wih this.

The other part of the equation is the timing of the hunting season, i.e. fall. It is well-documented that most white-tailed deer herds will earn about 30% 'interest' each year; in other words, about 30% of a deer herd needs to be removed each year during the hunting season just to maintain deer numbers and keep them from increasing. A pre-season herd of 1.5 million should have a harvest of about 450,000 just to keep even. Kill less, the herd increases; kill more and it decreases. This kill should be all antlerless deer, including buck fawns. I am not saying kill all the buck fawns; that is rediculous. But buck fawns have a higher mortality rate than other age/sex groups. It's just how it is. So people shouldn't get all bent out of shape about shooting buck fawns.

Lastly, although many hunters would like to see more deer (higher deer numbers) it must be remembered that the idea is to keep the herd not AT carrying capacity but well below it. The reason is that a herd at or above C.C. depletes the habitat, which then reduces it's C.C. From a hunting standpoint, the most 'harvestable deer' are produced by a herd that is about 1/2 the C.C. Fun stuff!!

Hunt in Vilas.. i saw 2 wolves, 0 deer in 5 days. The wolf population is probably getting bigger than the deer population.

I hate to keep rehashing this but the more I think about it, the more it eats at me. When I first started hunting some 30 years ago, I used to see alot more deer in the woods than I do now. I'd like to think that in all those years of hunting, that I learned a few things along the way. Apparantly not. I do not even see close to the number as I used to. At least back then, you could usually count on seeing one or two a day. Not alot I know, but then things got really good and to see 5-7 a day was awesome. Now to see 1 or two for the season, its depressing!
Ever since the "estimated" deer herd in Wisconsin zoomed up over 1.7 million (Nevermind the fact that the D.N.R. was off on their estimate) The actual number of deer killed or seen by hunters is dramatically down. It seems that the political powers and special interest groups have too much power and say in what our D.N.R. does and does not do. Baiting deer with corn, the farmers would loose too much money! Timberwolves, Oh aren't they pretty! In my oppinion, it seems the only thing the D.N.R. understands is money. How about if every camp out there was to buy two less tags next year? You know according to the papers and articles hunters do not know how to hunt anymore and the weather, it will probably be too hot or cold or too snowy or they wont give out as many bonus tags as last year so the kill will be down even more. Not only that hunters just like to get together for the camaraderie of it all anyway (hope you are catching the sarcasm). So two less tags for each camp and I'm sure we might be able to get through to some answers or ideas on how to fix the problem. Another thing, if the D.N.R. would at least realize there have been mistakes made in their management practices, why can't they just come out and fess up and offer an appology. You know something like "were sorry we reintroduced the timberwolf, we didn't know they would eat that many deer, and multiply so fast". Or how about "gee we didn't know that hunters putting all those piles of corn in the woods would screw up deer hunting".

that is my biggest complaint.

I can go a season without seeing a deer. Done it before, will probalby do it again. that is part of hunting...toatally OK with that.

It's the lies and misdirection, that bugs me so much. Come out and say "we [bleep] up the estimate. It's an estimate and we missed on it." That would go further with most hunter than the DNR thinks...I think.

to this point so far...I'm not buying a deer tag in WI next year.

At this point me either, that goes for archery and rifle. I can go to the cabin and relax and not have to pay for a license.

Yep... I can fish muskies, walleyes, and bluegills from the deck of the cabin, literally. Plus I can drink beer while I fish, so I have that going for me...which is nice.

Doughboy, I hunt pretty close to Rosholt and there was not nearly the fawns shot this year without EAB, of course they weren't there either but the public land didn't get hammered as bad. Unfortunately we saw a lot of deer heading into it.

Hunter's in this area aren't passing up deer because they all think they might not see another one.

Hey Randy, I hunt the first part of the season up in the Nicolet north of Hiles, and then do the second weekend here at home. I did not have much luck in Rosholt either. Even the number of shots heard in the woods was very low.

Any recent problems with Hmong hunters trespassing?

I haven't had any problems yet!

sss.

The DNR used to take pellet counts and give a Unit average of deer per Section in that Unit.They then got a Computer program which they based the herd size by the amount of deer killed in a unit.If the kill increased,they used that as a basis to say there are now more deer in that unit.The next year they would increase the no. of Doe tags available in that unit.Well they increased untill they have all but eliminated deer in some units and admit it now.I am for them getting off their asses and doing some field work.We had a more accurare estimate when they did,everyone saw deer and were happy.When they did that I always pulled off a Buck with bow and rifle and they were respectable deer.We took Does in our camp also,But they were never over shot and I never found dead deer in the woods from winter kill.That tells me that we were not above carring capicity for the land.i dont know what the Wi.DNR`s agenda is,but it is not about having happy hunters!!!!

Knowing 5 - 10 people that used to "do" pellet counts for the DNR, I can tell you it wasn't a science at all. They were dropped off in the morning, layed around all day reading a magazine or book packed in their lunch bags and picked up at the end of the day with false numbers filled into the columns on the paper. No more reliable than the so called computer generated data that you claim is false.

Maybe everyone with all of their infinate wisdom and knowledge of wildlife biology that has posted here should pony up and volunteer your time to help get an exact count of the deer in the woods. That way no one has anyone to blame but themselves.

We hunt area 53 near Necedah no deer for 5 days hunting. Out of the 8 of us on better than 120 acres None of us saw as much as a tail.

Or maybe thats the kind of people you associate with and not represenative of the majority!!!

Yep, you got me and all my friends figgered out. Wait, I think I hear a helicopter...

Problem identified. WI DNR outsources data collection. Contract with some pothead layabouts. Fuggers must have tasted the "pellets" thinking they were chocolate chips.

The spin doctors are hard at work. The care taken not to even mention the overpopulation of predators is kind of funny, in a DNR are calksuckers sort of way. FU WIDNR.

I wonder how many deer 500 plus wolves might kill per year? Not to mention fawns killed by bear, which are at an all time high & you have to wait many years to get a tag.. They have decided to let other predators (Who don't buy a license) "manage" their deer herd. It'll be interesting to see how THAT works out for 'em..
Northland Outdoors Article..

Wisconsin DNR: Deer harvest drops in Douglas, Bayfield counties
Wisconsin�s gun deer harvest dropped 24 percent from last year in Douglas County and 33 percent in Bayfield County, said Greg Kessler, Department of Natural Resources wildlife manager at Brule.
By: Sam Cook, Duluth News Tribune

Wisconsin�s gun deer harvest dropped 24 percent from last year in Douglas County and 33 percent in Bayfield County, said Greg Kessler, Department of Natural Resources wildlife manager at Brule.

Statewide, the preliminary gun deer harvest was down 29 percent from last year, according to the DNR. Hunters registered 195,647 deer, down from a preliminary harvest of 276,895 last year.

Many hunters said they just didn�t see many deer during the nine-day season that ended Sunday.

Pat Kukull of Superior Shooters Supply was surprised the harvest was down as much as it was.

�What I saw myself [hunting in Bayfield County], we saw deer,� she said. �But everybody who�s come in says it�s down, it�s down. Some even got skunked.�

�They were all saying they only saw the one they got or they didn�t see any at all,� said Brenda Bell, who works at Jim�s Bait in Barnes.

Kessler said this year�s hunt needs to be kept in perspective.

�I keep hearing comments that it�s a poor harvest or a poor season,� Kessler said. �But if you look at the long-term history, this was not a poor season.�

Much of the drop in harvest was attributable to fewer permits being available to take antlerless deer, he said. The antlerless deer harvest dropped 40 percent in Douglas County and 46 percent in Bayfield County.

The buck harvest was down just 1 percent in Douglas County and 16 percent in Bayfield County, Kessler said.

Through last year, the DNR offered liberal numbers of antlerless permits to bring deer populations down to management goals.

�We�ve come off a decade or so of record-breaking harvests,� Kessler said. �Comparing to recent memory is a difficult comparison. Those were the best years anybody can remember. I don�t think it�s as much doom and gloom as most hunters say.�

Some hunters who didn�t get a buck during the regular gun deer season will be hunting the muzzleloader season, Kukull said.

�The traffic for blackpowder, it�s phenomenal,� she said.

Again. No mention of predators.. They must have zero effect. FU WIDNR.

Blomberg: dismal deer harvest increases debate over changes. Link to another article.

Link from last year...

I see a trend. FU WIDNR. That agency is above the lowly hunters. They are a political arm of an out of control state government & have no accountability. I'm not sure, but I believe I saw a drone during rifle season that must have been DNR... Anybody know if they have such a thing? If so, they have waaaayyyy too much money to waste. I will be very interested to see what next year's license sales are. The WI DNR needs to be gutted like a fish and just start over. It's too far gone.

My FUWIDNR will likely manifest itself with my not buying a WI license for archery or gun season next year. Far too many states and provinces with their acts together for me to waste my time here. And my boycott will not matter in the least but at least, but in my own little world, as much as I live to chase whitetails, I know I'm not supporting the wrecking crew.

Well, that's my plan, as well. I think it may be more folks doing that than we may even guess, or hope.

Bruce-

Never in a million years did I think I'd utter those words but it's come to that.

Yep. It's actually heartbreaking. My time up there is cherished & I will still make my yearly excursions, but without supporting the dirty bastards with one MF red cent.

I was able to spend nearly 45 days up there this Fall & was able to put in more days in the field than many previous years combined. They have devastated the deer herd. There is no denying it. Many will try, but it is what it is. [bleep] wrecked.

Merry Christmas!

I posted this before too, as of now, I'm not buying a WI deer tag. It would be the first time since 1997, which is when I started to hunt in WI.

I can hunt the rut in MN, for 16 days, and not have to fight other hunters for area's that are "theirs" because they've been baiting them since Ocotober.

Like Skane...there are a lot of other options besides WI.

There's been no Earn-A-Buck or tzone's on beer, still have plenty.

oh jeeeze...if there was tags for that, we'd all be in trouble.

When The DNR had their Oct.meetings on the upcoming Hunt .It was asked if predators were taken in account and they said no.

Unfortunately the DNR is in complete spin mode on everything just trying to save their axxes. We need a changed in Govenor and DNR.

1. Decker is a political opportunist, big time lefty, never met a tax he didn't like and all he did was find a parade to jump in front of, like most politicians.

2. Road kill is a very good way to estimate herd numbers. The WI road kill has been decreasing steadily for the last 8 years.

3. The DNR is intentionally taking the herd down in anticipation of lower hunter numbers in the future.

I've posted the details in "Cheeseheads are serious" so I am not going to repeat.

Fast Ed

100% spot on!

He's transparent as a glasss house. Hopefully others are seeing the same.

The latest is that the DNR has pushed back their 2010 deer season recommendation until April 2010.

Probably want to wait until they see what the winter kill is.

Plenty of snow, so far. Looks like it may be a tough one.

Huntz,
That is not how the Sex-Age-Kill method works at all. Look it up on line and read it. Also look up the independent assessment of the Sex-Age-Kill method that was recently done by independent wildlife biologists from other parts of the country. The method the WDNR uses to estimate deer populations is sound; not perfect, but sound. I know you probably won't do this because it's easier to complain when you don't get 'your deer'.

BayDog,
If you 'know' 5-10 people that used to do deer pellet surveys, they were probably college students out supposed to be learning how to do that method and how it works. To my knowledge the WDNR hasn't used pellet surveys for a LONG time as part of their data analysis; those dirt bags would probably serve with the same excellence in any endeavor.

Well actually I do attend Deer meetings accross the State and was involved in the Deer 2000 project.I live and Trap where I hunt and probably have more field time than most DNR people.I am not claiming to be any kind of authority on the subject,but then again I am not some smuck sitting in a Gin Mill bitching about some thing I know nothing about.

FormerBiologist,

Most, if not all of them are at or near retirement from the millwright and electricans unions in the Fox Valley area of Wisconsin. All have kept gainful employment over the years and of the ones that I keep in touch with, are still working today, so are probably high up in the Union seniority list.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...lumn--Deer-alarmists-react-without-facts

I think I'll agree with Pat.

Now that the wolves have moved on there was more deer sign where I hunt this year than the previous two. However, because of the warm weather, the deer never had to move during the day. They could munch on azzhole's bait piles at night and hold up all day chewing their cud. Standing corn to the south compounded the problem there. Five guys in my party saw two deer and shot none all season. As I said plenty of deer but the conditions for success overall were limited.

I have nothing to complain about. The deer kill in Grant County WI fifty years ago was 728 . Deer kill in 2009 6.522 .

Did I kill a deer in 1959?...Yes. Did I kill a deer in 2009?...Yes.

Is this relevant? Let's sit down and have a couple of beers and discuss it sometime.

Well, I lied. Yep. I AM going to buy a 2010 WI gun license and hunt the whitetail. Well, more or less setup in whatever stand I have on my 40 that feels right for the day and wait and see what comes my way.

After last year seeing no deer I was pretty demoralized. But. This past January I gave up smoking the butts. So that means that this year I gets the opportunity to sit in the ladder with not stinking smokes burning, and no motion/noise made by me swmokin' them.

A few weeks ago I found the remains of a small 8 point that had been eaten. brain was pretty much all that was left of the flesh. Fuggin skull sure did stink. Shook the spine off, cut the back of skull behind antlers off w/ bow saw, dumped the brain. Gonna assume wolves or 'yotes took this on down.

Not to burst your bubble, but..... I've never smoked anything, never even tried it in my 33 years, and I didn't see a deer last year in WI.

All joking aside, good luck to you.

This will be the first time in 14 years I've not hunted in WI. The area were were in, the DNR, and the crew I was with, didn't make it fun anymore. If it's not fun, why do it. I'll be exclusivily hunting MN this year. I plan on doing a lot of it, weather permiting.

Best luck and a safe hunt to you tzone!