Felzkowski, Swearingen call out NRB, DNR

Each year a County Deer Advisory Council (CDAC) in each county in the state is charged with making decisions regarding the deer herd in the county and the framework of the fall hunting season. CDACs are made up of citizen volunteers in a number of stakeholder categories such as sporting groups, forestry, tourism, Tribal interests and others.

In recent years, the setting of antlerless quotas by the CDACs has been a point of contention with the Natural Resources Board (NRB). Three times, with this year being the third, recommended quotas from the CDACs have been changed in counties in the Northern Forest Zone. 

This year, this disagreement drew the attention of Northwoods lawmakers.

Setting quotas based on hunters success

Every three years the CDAC creates an overarching goal for the deer herd. The panel decides whether the ideal goal for the deer herd in the county is to maintain, increase, or decrease numbers. Based on that, each year the CDAC decides how many antlerless tags they believe should be available in the county, if any. The decision to make a number of tags available is based on the average success rate of hunters over the last five years and the number of antlerless deer the CDAC would like to see taken off of the landscape. For instance, in Oneida County, the average hunter success rate is 25%. That said, if the CDAC wanted a quota of 100 antlerless deer, they would set the number of antlerless tags at 400.

These decisions are not made in a vacuum, however. The CDACs hear a presentation from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) wildlife biologist in the county and they read the hundreds of comments that come in to the county through the DNR’s online input form. 

The public is also welcome to come to the CDAC meetings and offer input on the antlerless quota and provide anecdotal evidence of what they are seeing in the woods as hunters and stakeholders. At times, the CDAC may decide not to have any antlerless tags available for adults, or for adults and youth hunters alike.

This year

This year, the CDACs in Bayfield and Oneida counties decided they did not want to see an antlerless harvest in their counties. The CDAC in Oneida County still wanted to allow antlerless tags for youth hunters, but decided against tags on public land for adult hunters. 

This was done due to concern for the deer herd, at least in some parts of the county. Many hunters and other stakeholders said the deer herd had been “decimated” on public land in parts of the county. 

Some hunters who attended a listening session held by Senator Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) and Representative Rob Swearingen (R-Rhinelander) in Woodruff last winter said the deer herd was in crisis in the county and that perhaps there should not even be a hunt this year. With all of that concern growing, the CDAC felt it prudent to not allow antlerless harvest on public land for the 2024 deer season.

“The DNR asked me to write them a letter explaining why we did that,” said Oneida CDAC chair Ed Choinski. “And I wrote them a letter explaining everything. 

Choinski said he was told up front that neither the DNR or the administration was going to support the CDAC in offering no antlerless tags on public land. But he wrote the letter, explaining why the decision was made.

“Two weeks later, they told me they were behind the CDAC. They agreed with us, which I thought was great,” he noted.

 Choinski said he found out he even had the backing of the DNR administration. It was a shock, then, when the Natural Resources Board took a turn and voted to allow 400 antlerless tags on public land in both Oneida and Vilas counties.

Natural Resources Board

During the June NRB meeting, board member Marcy West said she felt there was an issue with the recommendation of zero for antlerless tags on public land in the two counties. 

“Overall, in Bayfield if you’re listening, in Oneida if you’re listening, I hear the concerns that there is reduced harvest and there is people not seeing deer in specific places where they saw deer years ago,” West said during that meeting. “But looking at this overall, I have significant concern that we are sending a significant message that antlerless permits are on private land and not on available on public land. And I think this board needs to take it very seriously that we send a message that whether you own land or have access to private land, we are doing what we can to offer opportunity, or some opportunities on public lands as well.” 

Board member Robin Schmidt agreed with West.

“I find that it’s really pretty disturbing that, it feels to me almost like we are privatizing hunting, and I just feel like that’s not the right direction to go in,” Schmidt said. “I know that’s not the intent here, so I feel like that’s maybe a little extreme of a statement.” She asked DNR deer program specialist Jeff Pritzl for a “token” number of antlerless tags that could be allowed without negatively influencing a deer population.

At that meeting, Wisconsin Conservation Congress chair Rob Bohmann asked the NRB to take the recommendations of the CDACs. However, West was steadfast in seeing some antlerless harvest on public land in both counties. Based on Pritzl’s response, she made a motion to allow 400 antlerless tags in both Bayfield and Oneida counties. In the case of Oneida County, this would mean a quota of 100 antlerless deer taken off of the landscape.

The fallout

Last week, Rep. Rob Swearingen (R-Rhinelander) and State Sen. Mary Felzkowski spoke out about what they called the NRB’s “blatant disregard” for the Northern Zone CDAC, saying other northern legislative colleagues felt this was an issue as well. In a recent press release, the lawmakers said they felt the board ignored input from the CDACs in the two counties. 

“It’s no surprise that the DNR and NRB took these recommendations and threw them in the trash. Deer hunting and the deer population are clearly not a priority for this administration, as Governor Evers, Attorney General Josh Kaul, DNR Deputy Secretary Steve Little, and six of the seven NRB members declined our invitation to hear real concerns from folks in northern Wisconsin. This latest move is just another notch in the bureaucratic belt that continues to squeeze our state’s longstanding hunting heritage into nonexistence,” the press release said.

“For whatever reason, and I don’t know why, but the Natural Resources Board didn’t like Bayfield’s and Oneida’s recommendations, so they went ahead and went against the CDACs, the Department of Natural Resources and the administration, and I don’t know why,” Choinski said.

He said some of the CDAC members were not happy, and wondered what the point of all of their work was when someone else could simply strike a pen through and change their recommendations.

“The Natural Resources Board has done that to us at least two other times,” Choinski said. “Two other times the board has reduced the number of tags issued in Oneida County. The thing about the process, where I’m not really so upset about it, is that so many people get a kick at the can at this thing. It’s just not one person setting policy anymore. By the time it gets shot out the other end, everybody’s had a chance at it and sometimes it’s just not what you want it to be.”

He said if the quota would have been 400, for instance, meaning 1,600 tags would be issued, he would have been very upset. In reality, the idea is to shoot 100 does in the county. He said, while the process did get stepped on, in his view, it is the way the process is designed and a function of how many entities have a chance to weigh in on the matter.

Part of the issue in Oneida County specifically was the desire to protect the deer herd on the west side of the county. The DNR has been reluctant to allow Oneida and Vilas to split their counties based on habitat rather than attempting to manage the entire herd based on county boundaries.

Choinski did say that he would like for CDAC chairs and co-chairs to be invited to a meeting where the board would look to change a CDAC recommendation. He said this would give the CDAC chairs the chance to talk face-to-face with the board and to help them to understand why the CDAC made the decision to begin with. 

He hopes this could become part of the process going forward.

Beckie Gaskill may be reached via email at [email protected].