Thoughts on deer hunting regs 2017

Anybody have opinions on the regulations and permit issues set down by the DNR? Interesting to me is how they definitely didn't seem to follow the input by sportsmen they requested. Can't wait for FNB's input.

I gotta admit, the 70s and early 80s were a lot more layed back, If you wanted to check out hunting techniques you got it out of a magazine, no TV star hunting celebrities. Monday after gun season folks asked how they did and the answer was a simple yes or no, buck or doe, nice one, or small. If a number was attached to the description it wasn't the inch total rather the weight. Folks didnt dress up in gear that costs hundreds, although I do admit that clothing has come leaps and bounds, but nobody got hung up on scent block and patterns, and you know what we still shot plenty of deer. Sometimes folks need to just take a deep breath.

(Disclaimer:  I say this as a generalization and not directed at anyone)

Do you mean the mentalities where everyone for the most part got along, neighbors let others hunt their properties, and people were happy for others success?  Versus now where many hunters want the deer for themselves, neighbors lock up their land, and hunters criticize those who don't abide by their self-made rules?  Get mad when someone else gets 'their' buck?  Yeah its so much better LOL.  Must be the video games keeping those kids out of the woods.

Them 50 year old mentalities are dropping out of the hunting pool pretty rapidly and the next generation isn't even hunting so I'm feeling like at 39 years old I should see the best hunting of my life   will be near retirement age  and how many ever years god gives me to enjoy my greatest passion. Our age group will reap the rewards of learning from the past and a downtrend in competition!! The future looks bright and we're already in august- counting the days

over browsing and a whole lot of other nonsense are what there teaching at the anti hunting school for butterflies ...

Another guy who thinks he knows all. I hunt illinois and texas so yes i hunt different states. Illinois is over populated in the northeastern part of the state thats why they have 8 different firearm season. Plus i do hunt buffalo county and see plenty of deer. And another thing great know it all deer dont eat leaves off of trees they eat the new growth off of shrubs and undergrowth. 

Buffalo co was more of a generalization for western wi where terrain deters hunters and helps a whitetail thrive.  I wouldn't hunt Buffalo if i had a choice of 3 or 4 other Co's in W or SW wisconsin. I do agree with you though,  numbers are down in quite a few places.  I do see them going up though in most areas i hunt.  Some never really had a population issue because of conservation.  the area doesn't have brown it's down symdrome and only take what their immediate family can eat in a year.

You must not hunt other states.  50 + a day in Iowa, Illinois and Missouri is nothing.  there isn't an over browsing issue,  trees all have leaves there too.  LMAO.  another brain washed wisconsinite. 

I see more deer in one day in most other midwestern states than i see in WI all year.  The DNR has everyone snowed here.  Over population...that's all bullchit.

I agree,  there really is no proof of DNR and insurance companies...but it sure in the heck seems as such.  There are NOT too many deer in WI,  there is not even close to an over population issue.  30 years ago I could sit public and see 10-12 deer a night.  now you are lucky to see a doe and 2 fawns and the same spiker all year.

Are there over populated area in Waupaca,  buffalo, green lake co etc....sure,  but at least they have fun in the woods.  Nothing like seeing deer.  

5 to 20 deer to be seen aday thats crazy talk. 5 i can understand but 20 come on. Thats an over populated area. Then u have over browseing that leads to starvation. There needs to be some kinda common ground with hunters and the dnr. Theres to many groups that want this or that with no compromise. Take away permanent deer houses thats not hunting. Have one tag for each season but its a either or tag. We need to work together to make this a great deer hunting state again.

Just once I'd like to see someone put forth solid evidence that the insurance industry has any impact on DNR management strategy. Car/deer collisions are just one of many risk factors that are analyzed to the nth degree by actuaries who make good money making sure the premiums you and I pay make their companies  (in the long run) an acceptable profit.

Heaven knows our DNR has issues managing the deer herd but regurgitating the years old collusion theory with the insurance industry isn't logical or accurate... unless you have that smoking gun evidence I've yet to see.

Remember who ever buys the liscense has the right to choose a legal deer of their choice

I agree with this to a point.  This is what got WI is trouble several years ago. Since it's legal, people feel entitled to kill everything.  This is WI,  the DNR and insurance companies are in bed together.  It's like male lions eating their own offspring.  Just because the DNR says we can and the DNR "claims" there are a ton of deer we can shoot extra.  Oddly enough,  that caught up to people.  

So legal deer kills i can respect.  Being a slob i can't respect.

And thank you for your time served.  That I can respect w o thinking.

To me,  quality hunting is when you can go out and see 5-20 deer every time out.  Good age structure what makes good hunting.  Shooting the first fork horn or 6 pt you see is not helping the state.  I sure do agree that "you can't eat the horns".  That's a very common term around here.  that said,  since you can't eat the horns, why shoot a small buck?  As you stand before God,  I highly doubt anyone could tell him I hunt just for meat,  couldn't care less about horns.  I don't believe anyone actually means this.  where this attitude stems from is 50 years of people being conditioned to never killing a buck over the age of 2 maybe 3.  The state will not impose any rules to make people stop hunting or make it seem like they are managing for age structure.  It has to start with the hunters.  WI has so much terrain that is to the deer's advantage most times.  if you let a buck walk that is 2 years old,  when he's 3 it will be much tougher to kill him.  Then when someone does and hes is 4 or 5,  that will be one of the most amazing hunts for that person.  Other states let deer walk and have quality deer age structure.  

WI is highly pressured,  i'd have a hard time believing the average buck age for the state even makes 2.5.  Quality is all about age and having the opportunity to see deer each time out.  It's fun to see deer,  even smaller deer.  Rather than shooting that doe and her two fawns,  let her fawns go live and grow up.  Or rather than shooting the doe,  shoot the doe fawn.  Many think that is nuts,  but your doe fawn will be better eating than spike buck.  

In conclusion,  it's not only the DNR and regulations,  it's the need to kill kill kill from our hunters.  You want to manage,  take it in your hands,  pass some deer,  shoot older bucks.  Take a doe for meat.  I know some guys that kill 6 doe a year cause they need it for food.  No one needs 6 deer a year....you have to conserve if you want to pull from that resource for life.  You can't expect a resource to be there for life if you continually rape it.  pretty simple.  WI hunters are like Wolves,  they hunt and kill everything then have to move on because there is none left.  Simple principal...humans have brains and can think logically,  let's start doing that.

I have just kinda thrown my hands up in the air and said WTF. Everytime I read online, in Wisconsin Outdoor News,Milwaukee Journal Sentinal or on our local news about these so called Outdoorsman state Senators or Assembly men that come up with these crock of sheet ideas that we "need" to continue the tradition. They are dismanteling or trying to dismantel so many rules and regulations just asking for violations. I sure as heck dont blame the DNR. I hold these jackasses in office accountable for most of the obsurdity.

"Manage deer not license sales"

Now that is actually a fairly profound observation and one I would wholeheartedly agree with. Not that it would ever happen in even a portion of Wisconsin. Those of us who love (quality) hunting will pony up the money required to keep a top quality management program afloat without complaint. The problem arises when even nominal fees are questioned because the end product ( hunting experience) is marginalized.

Business 101, but a principle our game managers seem to find baffling...

I think heading up north for gun season is a tradition, granted that's not always about the hunting.  Bow hunting or hunting the southern half of the state, not so much.  I say that because I have some old regulations from the 1930's, I picked them up cheap, kind of interesting.  Back then the southern half of the state had no season and archery was only open in 2 counties.  If that would be a tradition, it would be a modern times one because the northwoods hunting goes back a lot further.  All the hunting was in the north, all the deer were in the north.  Things kind of flipped around now.  Of course the predator seasons were much more liberal back then.  The 1936 regs have an addition added after the main printing that extended the wolf season into March.  That would have also been after the big logging era so habitat was probably pretty good.  I hear stories about the first time people saw deer in the southern half of the state, how amazed they were to see one.  How they didn't think they'd do well because they thought they needed big woods, how wrong they were.  I think we get hung up on modern times and don't even realize how drastically its changed.

I don't know why people refer to hunting as a tradition.  I don't even think of it that way.  Watching the sun set on Jan 8th from a tree is a tradition. Going out to Good Ole Days on Lake puckaway to have all you can eat fish and chicken during the rut is a tradition....going hunting is a way of life. I couldn't care less if 300k gun hunters sold their guns and never stepped in the woods again and a yearly resident bow tag cost me $100.  I'm a little sick of "the state" calling hunting a tradition and thinking of new ways of "keeping the tradition" alive.  If you need additional incentives to keep hunting,  you're not really what i'd call a hunter.  You are a opportunist as best.  Next,  baiting will be allowed again to keep the "traditionalist" hunting and not turning in their guns for golf clubs.  This state is sick...baiting is the worst thing for hunting.  it should be banned forever and never even on the docket to legalize. Id rather see the state legalize the Chronic (weed) where it would actually give the state some value add in millions of dollars maybe even billions.  Keeping joe blow in the woods for his $24 is doing little if anything.....