Go Back   QDMA Forums > General QDM > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-03-2013, 10:25 PM
Terrific_tom's Avatar
Terrific_tom Terrific_tom is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: N.E. Wisconsin, Hunt North Central, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,998
Default Wisconsin 2013 Preliminary Gun Harvest Results

I gun hunted in Bayfield County on public land as I have done for the last 28 seasons. Very few deer were saw. The harvest in Bayfield County was down 33%. I can honestly say that this might have been the last season for me to hunt there with family and friends in Bayfield County. This is the 5th season that the deer kill has gone down. I see little to nothing being changed to reverse the downward spiral of the deer population there. Here is the link that breaks the harvest down by county.

http://dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/Opening_...n_2013_FIN.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-03-2013, 10:30 PM
MDuffy's Avatar
MDuffy MDuffy is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gallatin County, IL USDA Zone 6b
Posts: 9,183
Default

So, the doe harvest was exactly the same and the buck harvest was off 15%. How much of that can be attributed to more strict mgmt, apr's, leases etc?

One would think if the herd were suffering the harvest would drop across the board.
__________________
Matt



Check us out at www.thecountrylodge.com

Providing affordable hunts and lodging in Gallatin and White Counties in Southern Illinois!!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-03-2013, 10:37 PM
Chainsaw's Avatar
Chainsaw Chainsaw is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: northern new york off eastern end of Lake Ontario zone 5A
Posts: 1,453
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDuffy View Post
So, the doe harvest was exactly the same and the buck harvest was off 15%. How much of that can be attributed to more strict mgmt, apr's, leases etc?

One would think if the herd were suffering the harvest would drop across the board.

Did they give more doe tags? That could keep the doe harvest the same even with a dwindling population.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-03-2013, 10:39 PM
Terrific_tom's Avatar
Terrific_tom Terrific_tom is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: N.E. Wisconsin, Hunt North Central, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDuffy View Post
So, the doe harvest was exactly the same and the buck harvest was off 15%. How much of that can be attributed to more strict mgmt, apr's, leases etc?

One would think if the herd were suffering the harvest would drop across the board.

There are pockets in the state where the deer numbers are way over management goals which account for the anterless harvest for the whole state to be the same as last year. Wisconsin has no APR's. If you would take a line and draw it across the Northern 1/3 of Wisconsin you would be amazed at how much the deer numbers have dropped.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-03-2013, 11:05 PM
popeyoung9's Avatar
popeyoung9 popeyoung9 is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,958
Default

Thanks for the post. Bucks down 7%, antlerless a push. Waupaca was #1 and Marathon #2 for total harvest.

1) Brutal weather opening weekend sent must in by 10am without heaters/towers.
2) Rut was well over and the bucks were augered in
3) More hunters are passing the young bucks.
4) lots of standing corn
5) Drives are all but a memory

North of hwy 29 continues to need real help with deer #'s. South of hwy 29 continue with loads of deer. We will take 25 baldies this year down from 35 last year but my gut tells me when the corn goes down locally we should probably have taken 45 even tho the neighbors aren't seeing deer.
Considering the opening weekend weather this is a win.
__________________
“When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.”
― John Muir
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-03-2013, 11:16 PM
Terrific_tom's Avatar
Terrific_tom Terrific_tom is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: N.E. Wisconsin, Hunt North Central, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popeyoung9 View Post
Thanks for the post. Bucks down 7%, antlerless a push. Waupaca was #1 and Marathon #2 for total harvest.

1) Brutal weather opening weekend sent must in by 10am without heaters/towers.
2) Rut was well over and the bucks were augered in
3) More hunters are passing the young bucks.
4) lots of standing corn
5) Drives are all but a memory

North of hwy 29 continues to need real help with deer #'s. South of hwy 29 continue with loads of deer. We will take 25 baldies this year down from 35 last year but my gut tells me when the corn goes down locally we should probably have taken 45 even tho the neighbors aren't seeing deer.
Considering the opening weekend weather this is a win.

10 years ago Bayfield County deer harvest was number 2 and only a handful of deer behind Waupaca.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-03-2013, 11:19 PM
smsmith smsmith is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Todd County, MN - (USDA zone 3b/4a)
Posts: 13,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrific_tom View Post
10 years ago Bayfield County deer harvest was number 2 and only a handful of deer behind Waupaca.

A lot can happen in 10 years....just ask the MN hunters who've lost over 50% of the deer killed in that time span.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-03-2013, 11:23 PM
popeyoung9's Avatar
popeyoung9 popeyoung9 is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrific_tom View Post
10 years ago Bayfield County deer harvest was number 2 and only a handful of deer behind Waupaca.

Yep, wolves and too many antlerless tags not to mention regular brutal winters.
__________________
“When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.”
― John Muir
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-04-2013, 09:37 AM
Terrific_tom's Avatar
Terrific_tom Terrific_tom is offline
QDMA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: N.E. Wisconsin, Hunt North Central, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,998
Default

Watching the morning news and the Wisconsin DNR is already making excuses [Cold weather, Late Start of season] why the gun deer kill was down. This was the lowest gun deer kill in 20 years. Why can't they just say that their estimates on deer populations are off?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-04-2013, 09:48 AM
smsmith smsmith is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Todd County, MN - (USDA zone 3b/4a)
Posts: 13,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrific_tom View Post
Why can't they just say that their estimates on deer populations are off?

That's what I don't get either. Why can't a DNR just say..."we've been trying to reduce the deer herd for years and we appear to have done so"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.