WI Politics at its finest – Good bye deer hunting

Randy,
Thank you for your email. I share your concerns about the Department’s revised overwinter population goals. Unfortunately, Rep Hraychuck chose to not hold a Public Hearing or Executive Session on the revisions. Earlier today, I put out a press release on this issue. I will attach it to the end of this email. Again, thank you for your email.

Sincerely,

Rep. Scott Gunderson

83rd Assembly District

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For Further Information Contact:

State Representative Scott Gunderson

(R-Waterford) (608) 266-3363 March 31, 2010

Rep. Hraychuck Ignores Wisconsin’s Deer Hunters

Hraychuck’s Decision Could Have a Devastating Impact on Deer Herd

MADISON… Representative Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) was shocked that the Chairwoman of the Assembly Fish and Wildlife Committee, Ann Hraychuck (D-Balsam Lake), turned a deaf ear to the wishes of Wisconsin’s deer hunters by refusing to hold a Public Hearing on the modifications made by the DNR to Clearinghouse Rule 09-053. This Clearinghouse Rule sets the deer management unit population goals for the entire state of Wisconsin.

“I was surprised that Representative Hraychuck turned down my request for a Public Hearing on the modifications made by the Department of Natural Resources to Clearinghouse Rule 09-053,” stated Gunderson. “Refusing my request for a Public Hearing was a slap in the face to the deer hunters of Wisconsin who still do not agree with the DNR’s revised overwinter deer population goals. What is truly shocking is the fact that the Assembly Fish and Wildlife Committee had a Public Hearing and Executive Session already scheduled for March 31st, the last day the Committee could act on this Clearinghouse Rule.”

After hearing testimony from hundreds of deer hunters that the DNR’s population goals were too low, the Assembly Committee on Fish and Wildlife voted to request that the DNR make modifications to Clearinghouse Rule No. 09-053. Earlier this month, the Natural Resources Board approved a revised overwinter deer population goal of 794,172 which is an increase of only 54,172 deer. At the same time, the DNR currently estimates the state’s deer herd size at 990,390, or 25% above their new goal.

“After years of overharvest because of T-Zone and Earn-a-Buck policies, the overwhelming majority of deer hunters are extremely displeased with the current size of the deer herd,” said Gunderson. “We have witnessed historic declines in the number of deer harvested over the past two seasons, so an increase in the overwinter deer population goal of only 54,000 deer is completely inadequate.”

Gunderson continued, “What is most amazing is the fact that during the 2009 deer season hunters registered the fewest deer in 27 years and 29 % fewer deer than 2008, which was already 26% lower than 2007, and the DNR believes we are still 25% above the overwinter goal.”

The 9-day deer gun season annually generates $1 billion of economic impact to our state’s economy, so this is an issue that impacts, not only hunters, but all Wisconsin residents.

“Because of Representative Hraychuck’s inaction there may be long-lasting and devastating effects on not only Wisconsin’s white-tail population, but also our economy,” concluded Gunderson.

Sounds like politics at it finest once again…..in the end no one wins.

But I will say this is an issue that the hunters need to look themselves in the mirror and ask who really forced us in to the overkill situation. Did the WDNR force many hunters to shoot at every antlerless deer they saw during the EAB and T-zone seasons? Did the WDNR force hunters to buy the extra tags that were made available for $2 or $12? In a sense many hunter have only themselves to blame because during the EAB seasons a hunter only had to harvest one antlerless deer during the archery season to make themselves legal to harvest a buck and the same for the firearm season. Many hunters harvested a lot more than they need too and now blame the WDNR for population decline in certain areas of the state. I just don’t get it I guess!!!!!

The avasilable extra tag lowered the population but they are asking for alot more. I don’t think the decrease in population is due to the tags we purchased. winters and other factor effect the population. It is amazing that they look at dropping deer herds even more. They don’t even have a good way of counting them anyway. look at the bear count they admitted to being way off and still don’t drop the population on them to a satble rate. we have more bear per mile then deer now with managed land. doesn’t make any sense.

Are the ramps open in November?

Vomit.

for these types of people they have no clue this is why the
house and all these reps should have no say and let the dnr run their programs we dont all agree with the dnr but i guess in away most must or they would rally to vote out and over turn seats deer hunting has gotten so bad by us we fish and hunt otheir stuff waterfowl grouse and pheasant i know it pisses some deer hunters off but oh well theirs not enough deer to go around not a tradition in our family any more THANKS GOOD OLD STATE OF WI REPS

Do what I did 3 years ago. Stop buying a license. I don’t agree what the dnr was doing with the earn a buck so why buy a license and support them.
Doug

Or if you are a landowner just don’t let others hunt and don’t shoot so many deer yourselves. Landowners in Wisconsin need to show the DNR they will control the deer herd, not the DNR.

Well looks like i,m hanging up the gun and bow and extending my fall fishing season.

To me, its such a frustrating situation. I have two daughters that I am trying to raise in a tradition of fishing and hunting – AND educating in good ethics. They hear all the stories of us guys seeing 5,10, 20 deer a day…they see only a couple of deer for all season, and wonder why some hunters shoot everything they see, some are very selective, and the DNR promotes “shoot more”.

I understand the difference of the deer herd size from back in the 80’s when I had days that I saw over 100 deer per day. Crop damage was ridicules, not enough suitable habitat, and a lot of urban issues. Then the party tag was changed to a hunters choice, bonus tags became available in addition to crop damage tags, and I saw much less deer. Then Earn a buck came along, and I have few days I don’t see a single deer. Then CWD……

Interesting that in 1986, we were “at goal”, most people were very happy, and we all saw a lot more deer. Which meant a lot more kids stayed interested.

Interesting article from the Milwaukee Sent. from 1986
Milwaukee 1986 deer story

Wisconsin dnr is digging a very deep hole for the coming years and my reaction is to stop hunting in wisconsin until something changes for the better.

Ajs

Quote:

---

for these types of people they have no clue this is why the house and all these reps should have no say and let the dnr run their programs we dont all agree with the dnr

---

It’s hard to keep all these different groups straight. From my understanding, the DNR is recommending the lower deer herd numbers (Clearinghouse Rule). Most hunters don’t agree with the DNR (me included). The Natural Resources Board (from what I understand – their role is to keep the DNR in check) is refusing to overrule the DNR. So is the Assembly Committee. It’s too bad none of these 3 groups are capable of representing the people they are suppose to serve.

Oh yeah. Thanks for posting Randy. It’s not always easy to stay informed on issues I consider important.

Let’s also thank Gov. Doyle for going back on a campaign promise about the head of the DNR appointment. The bill finally gets to him and he vetoes it.
Hope everyone remembers all of this come the next election.

I tend to stay away from political-type posts, and I’m in total favor of taking the politics out of our outdoors, but there was a response to this suggestion of Rep Gundersons. Here it is:

For Immediate Release Contact: Rep. Ann Hraychuck
March 31, 2010 Madison Office: 608-267-2365
Toll-free: 1-888-529-0028
What Rep. Gunderson Didn’t Say
MADISON–State Representative Ann Hraychuck (D-Balsam Lake), Chair of the Assembly Fish and Wildlife
Committee, issued the following statement in response to Rep. Gunderson’s press release regarding
Clearinghouse Rule 09-053, which sets deer management unit population goals:
“The Assembly Fish and Wildlife Committee asked the DNR to revise that rule—and they did. The original
rule only included population increases in 13 deer management units. The revised rule now includes increases
in 43. Rep. Gunderson was the only member of this bi-partisan committee that requested a second public
hearing on Clearinghouse Rule 09-053.
“What Rep. Gunderson failed to mention is that if this rule didn’t go through, the 2010 deer season would have
to be set based on the old population goals, which is almost 60,000 less than the new ones. This rule moves our
deer population in the right direction, which is up.
“The whole reason we are in this mess to begin with is because of the decision Rep. Gunderson made five years
ago. What Rep. Gunderson fails to tell hunters across the state is that it was under his watch that he allowed the
DNR to decrease our deer population. When the deer population goals were reviewed in 2005 by the Assembly
Natural Resources Committee—which he chaired at the time—he held a public hearing on the rule but never
asked the DNR for modifications.
“Furthermore, if Rep. Gunderson disliked the T-Zone and Earn-A-Buck policies so much, then maybe he should
have done something about them when he was Chair. But he didn’t. When I began my term as Chair last year,
I took the deer population problem head on. And now we have fewer herd control units, Earn-A-Buck only in
CWD zones, and with this new rule, we’ll have more deer.
“Finally, if Rep. Gunderson is so disgusted with the DNR, then perhaps he should have voted to override the
Governor’s veto on the DNR Secretary Bill, AB 138.”

Like every drama, there is more sides to the story