 |
|
CWD Advisory Board Letter |
Our overall impression is that the DNR has stepped backward, not forward, with this
10 year plan. It seems to be based on a thought process that is out of sync with the reality of
our current situation. We say this for 7 reasons, each of which we discuss
more fully in attachments to this letter. First, the plan is not written
in language that reveals the whole truth to the reader [See Attachment A]. Second, the plan reverts to the doomsday tone of contentious past policy
even though evidence now shows that CWD poses nowhere near the threat it
was imagined to be seven years ago when the disease was discovered in Wisconsin
[See Attachment B]. Third, the plan is justified using questionable numbers and computer simulation
models [See Attachment C]. Fourth, the plan largely ignores the fact that people throughout the country,
including in Wisconsin, have moved beyond their initial fears and have learned
to live with CWD in the wild deer herd [See Attachment D]. Fifth, data show that hunters have not abandoned CWD management zones in
Wisconsin or elsewhere in the country, so dire predictions that CWD will cause
the hunting economy to collapse are overblown [See Attachment E]. Sixth, the plan rejects a number of suggestions that a statewide group
of stakeholders (SAG) felt were critical to the success of future policy [See Attachment F]. The DNR dismisses SAG recommendations at great cost and risk to future policy
outcomes. And, seventh, the plan creates unrealistically high expectations
that the DNR cannot meet with the means proposed, making for bad public policy
[See Attachment G]. In spite of these negative comments, we do feel the DNR has proposed some welcome changes to past policy. The plan acknowledges that CWD has likely been in Wisconsin for decades, and will be here for decades to come. Thus we are encouraged with proposed actions aimed at helping people live with the reality of the disease in the deer herd. Although these are relatively minor concessions to public will, if they are pursued vigorously they should substantially increase support among hunters and landowners for future policy. We consider the following actions to be positive steps and recommend their acceptance: Simplified and rationalized season structure Single CWD Management Zone Stable regulations for a period of years Continued surveillance with extra focus at the management zone margin Hunter access to testing within and near the management zone An expanded and vigorous food pantry initiative Continuing research related to CWD issues Expanded CWD education If the plan did not go beyond these positive proposals, we would be delighted with the progress it would herald. Unfortunately, we are disheartened to find other aspects in the plan to be so regressive that they threaten to undo its positive features. The plan proposes a number of specific actions that will be toxic to hunters and landowners and will only end up further eroding public support for DNR staff and programs. The 5 proposals we think are most likely to derail the plan are the following: [1] Sharpshooting by government agents and their private contractors should be restricted to removing sick or injured animals, or for localized surveillance sampling when CWD is discovered outside the existing management zone. Reasons: First, sharpshooting is counterproductive because it causes fewer deer to be shot by disgusted hunters who are trying to compensate for an uncertain sharpshooter kill. Second, taxpayers are appalled with being forced to pay government workers or private contractors hundreds of dollars for killing each deer. Third, many people feel it sends mixed messages when the DNR adopts widely condemned poaching methods (unlimited shooting from vehicles at night over bait with noise-suppressed rifles) to kill deer. Fourth, it raises questions about where the DNR is finding the excess money and staff time for sharpshooting when facing budget cuts. Fifth, the "other states do it" justification is for the most part bogus. Illinois shooting is largely done on Forest Preserve (public) land, not on private land as proposed in the WDNR plan. Sixth, the "unhunted lands" justification is dishonest. DNR research indicates that bait piles in southern Wisconsin in the depths of winter readily attract deer from a distance of 2 miles, providing an opportunity for sharpshooters to kill deer from a "baitshed" of more than 10 square miles. It is misleading to spin this as killing deer on otherwise unhunted private land holdings. And, finally, government killing leads people to wonder how far the DNR is willing to go to bypass hunting as the traditional deer management tool of choice. read more... |