Dr. Deer Gives us the Wrong Prescription

After having a very successful deer season on my private land I thought it might be worth re-printing my letter to the HTR editor.  It seems that the rest of the state didnt fare so well.  Could it be that the hunters are simply not being allowed to hunt?

While running for Governor in 2010 Scott Walker made a number of assertions that somehow the drop in the deer harvest from the record high of the 2000 hunt was somehow the result of DNR mismanagement under then Governor Doyle. Now, for the third year in a row since the “Dr. Deer” changes were implemented the harvest has plummeted to below thirty year lows, down three fifths from the high in 2000. This despite the introduction of more lethal means of taking deer like statewide use of rifles and crossbows. If the goal was to increase hunter's chances of taking a deer this does not sound like success.

The rise of harvest over 90 years.

At the same time licenses have gotten more complicated, expensive and discriminatory. We have gone from a simple universal $2.00 antlerless tag to a $12.00 tag that is only good in one county and then either on public or private land severely limiting hunter mobility. Public land tags were sold out early in most counties. All the more disturbing is Walker's plan to sell off 10,000 acres of those public lands. Not surprising since “Czar” Kroll described public land hunting as “Communism”.

Drop in harvest continues under Walker. 

With all the waling and gnashing of teeth Republicans made a great deal of political hay when the harvest fell below the 2000 high of a half million shouldn't we expect a better outcome? With fewer hunters having family connections to private lands it is not the herd that is dwindling it is access to the herd. The Kroll program has accelerated that and the frustration has resulted in more and more people giving up the sport. The Legislature's response has been to allow women to wear pink while hunting. They may find themselves all dressed up and no place to go.

Read it online

At the same time, the Legislature is considering a bill to reduce regulations on  game farms.  This when a new outbreak of CWD has occurred at yet another canned hunt emporium in Three Lakes.  The discovery will not radically alter hunting in the affected counties as baiting will now be banned in order to stop the spread of the disease and baiting is the primary method of hunting in the unpopulated woodlands there.

See jsonline artice here:

Three Lakes Game Farm is the same sort of operation run by Deer Czar Kroll in Texas and imported deer from Canada and the west which brought the disease to our state.  They charge between $5000 and $7500 for the "experience" of shooting a trophy buck in a fenced enclosure....

Apparently shooting Canadian genes is a bigger rush than Wisconsin genetics offer.

After three years of gross mismanagement the legacy of Walker and his quack doctor will affect the hunt for decades.  When will we begin the walk back to sanity and science and the public interest?

Collin Bruanel: I Don't Need No Stinking Badges!

Did the Manitowoc County GOP chair just cop to a felony?

"Collin Braunel Bernie Starzewski, while I was on council what would you have thought of me carrying? I carry a hangun every day at work yet I am a civilian. I also am heavily trained. Interestingly enough I carry no license. [...]

December 13, 2015 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter facebook page 

 facebook post by the Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter 

941.235  Carrying firearm in public building.

 (1) Any person who goes armed with a firearm in any building owned or leased by the state or any political subdivision of the state is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

 (2) This section does not apply to any of the following:

[a-d police former or current]

(e) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out-of-state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g).

941.23  Carrying concealed weapon.
 (2) Any person, other than one of the following, who carries a concealed and dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor:  [a-c again police former or current]

[...]

(d) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d)

In other words... No license = ILLEGAL 

Maybe Mr. Braunel does not understand that a State issued permit is required for concealed carry?  Yet he claims he has been fully trained.  One would expect that training might include information about the governing law.

Then too when he first took office in 2010 concealed carry was not legal anywhere in Wisconsin and only became legal in 2011 after the Republicans took over and passed it so it might depend on when he carried in city hall too.

Mr. Braunel appears to be laboring under the illusion that his job as a security guard alone entitles him to carry his weapons anywhere he likes.  Unfortunately, the reverse is true. 

Mr. Braunel is REQUIRED to have a permit for it gun at work!

Linkedin page

Wisconsin Statute 440.26 clearly states that a license is in fact required and in particular as it relates to "dangerous weapons" used on the job by security guards.

(3m) Rules concerning dangerous weapons. The department shall promulgate rules relating to the carrying of dangerous weapons by a person who holds a license or permit issued under this section or who is employed by a person licensed under this section. The rules shall meet the minimum requirements specified in 15 USC 5902 (b) and shall allow all of the following:

(a) A person who is employed in this state by a public agency as a law enforcement officer to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (1) (g) 2. to 5. and (2) (b) 1. to 3. applies.

(b) A qualified out-of-state law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 941.23 (1) (g), to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (2) (b) 1. to 3. applies.

(c) A former officer, as defined in s. 941.23 (1) (c), to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (2) (c) 1. to 7. applies.

(d) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out-of-state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), to carry a concealed weapon as permitted under s. 175.60.

Mr. Braunel is not a current or former law officer.  With no license to carry he is NOT permitted to carry a weapon on the job.

Be that as it may, Mr. Braunel was asking what I would have thought if he was carrying a weapon in Manitowoc City Council chambers with no license.  My answer is, that if he did so he was in violation of the law as even under the most liberal reading of the statute it at least a misdemeanor.

At the same time violations of the licensing requirement for security guards carry some hefty penalties:

 (8) Penalties. Any person, acting as a private detective, investigator or private security person, or who employs any person who solicits, advertises or performs services in this state as a private detective or private security person, or investigator or special investigator, without having procured the license or permit required by this section, may be fined not less than $100 nor more than $500 or imprisoned not less than 3 months nor more than 6 months or both. Any agency having an employee, owner, officer or agent convicted of the above offense may have its agency license revoked or suspended by the department. Any person convicted of the above offense shall be ineligible for a license for one year.

Mr. Braunel has a lot of explaining to do.