The Wisconsin Conservation Congress is taking public input between 7pm on April 11 through 7pm on April 14 (Central Time).

I just followed my own advice and completed the vote (or survey, as the DNR and Conservation Congress prefer to call it). I plowed through every question including all the ones submitted in Dane County. Some of these are important issues and Madison Audubon has provided some voting recommendations below. I hope they're helpful but please vote regardless of whether you agree with all of them.

Scroll down to see Madison Audubon’s voter guide, as well as other conservation organizations’ voter guides.

Viewing every question was instructive. The Dane County resolutions were often focused on the toxic effects of lead ammunition and fishing tackle. One common theme throughout the citizen submitted resolutions was disgust over killing contests. These are apparently local events in which contestants compete to kill the most animals of a designated species, often the coyote. As I've noted in previous blogs I'm a hunter but this practice disgusts me. I just don't see the point of trying to kill as much of any species as you can for any reason. The predator control rationale doesn't work. Coyotes increase their reproduction in the face of killing pressure. If there is a coyote problem, we can't kill our way out of it. This is an issue I'll keep an eye on—I'd especially welcome more information on how many of these tournaments are occurring.

While the Legislature did not act on the Sandhill Crane hunting season, one reason to look for county resolutions is that some counties have crane hunting season questions. If you believe Wisconsin should not have such a season, vote against it every chance you have.

Many counties will also have questions related to lead or toxic ammunition and tackle. Lead poisoning is an awful way for a bird to die, and it happens ALL TOO OFTEN in Wisconsin. It’s a solvable problem. Please vote to remove lead as an option for hunting and fishing.

And, for participating in the hearings, here is your reward: find today's (4/12/22) New York Times Science Section. It's one great bird story after another including all you'd ever want to know about starlings (including questioning the oft-reported tale of how starlings came to this country), one on bird wanderers or pioneers with some great photos, and a report on how some penguins are coping with climate change.

Thanks and take care,

Topf Wells, Madison Audubon advocacy committee chair

Cover photo by Monica Hall

Wisconsin Conservation Congress: Madison Audubon Voter Guide

Below are questions pulled out of the statewide questionnaire that relate to bird conservation, as well as the Madison Audubon response. Click here to view the Sierra Club of Wisconsin’s very thorough voter guide as well.

11-12. Imposing stricter regulations on PFAS chemicals

PFAS chemicals (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are found in objects such as Teflon, water resistant clothing, food packaging, and firefighting foam. These man-made chemicals may increase cholesterol levels, decrease the body’s ability to respond to vaccines, increase the risk of thyroid disease, decrease fertility in women, increase risk of serious conditions in pregnant women, and pose a significant threat to our aquatic species and ecosystems. PFAS water contamination is undoubtedly a pervasive environmental issue; there are more than 50 PFAS contamination sites across Wisconsin. Due to the historical lack of regulations of PFAS chemicals, Wisconsin communities have suffered from consuming contaminated fish and drinking contaminated water. Fishing is an integral part of Wisconsin life, but its future is threatened by PFAS contamination. Because PFAS chemicals accumulate in fish, the DNR has issued fishing advisory warnings on major waterways around the state including Lake Superior, Lake Monona, and the Biron and Petenwell Flowages of the Wisconsin River, and the Bay of Green Bay and associated Tributaries. Communities reliant upon fishing such as the Ojibwe tribes are particularly vulnerable to the ramifications of PFAS pollution. Wisconsin’s drinking water has also been compromised by PFAS contamination. Hundreds of residents across the state are now reliant on bottled water as their groundwater and well water is unsafe to drink due to high levels of PFAS.

11. Would you support additional testing for PFAS levels in drinking water across Wisconsin? YES

12. Would you support the DNR continuing to advocate for strong PFAS protections and clean-up to ensure that everyone has access to clean drinking water and safe consumption of fish? YES

The health of our human and wildlife communities are both harmed by the presence of PFAS in our drinking water and environment.

18. Remove Burbot from the list of Wisconsin Rough Fish

Burbot (also called eelpout and lawyer) is a valuable native fish species found in Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and many inland Wisconsin waters. Burbot, along with Lake Trout, were one of the top native predatory fish in Wisconsin's Great Lakes waters. Burbot numbers have rebounded in recent years and are increasingly popular with sport anglers. Presently, Burbot are considered a "rough fish" by law. As a result, they are not protected and can be taken year-round and in unlimited numbers by hand, hook and line, spear and other methods. Removing Burbot from the list of rough fish would allow it to be managed as a game fish.

18. Would you support a legislative change that would remove Burbot from the list of Wisconsin rough fish? YES

Native fish species are crucial to ecosystems. By removing Burbot from the list of rough fish, their populations will be better protected.

29. Support wolf population goal of 350 or less wolves

The Wisconsin Conservation Congress overwhelmingly supported a resolution in 2011 favoring a population goal of 350 or less wolves in the Wisconsin wolf management plan. There are many farm and wildlife organizations that support this goal, along with 36 county board resolutions. The Wisconsin wolf population, estimated at its lowest point in the annual cycle in spring 2020, was estimated at approximately 1195 wolves. Wolf depredations, harassments, and threats continue to be an issue across Wisconsin.

29. Do you support a population management goal of 350 wolves or less for the state of Wisconsin? NO

The “goal of 350 or less” is not informed by scientists who study wolves and ecosystems. It also is not based on any input from Wisconsin’s Tribal Nations, whose perspectives must be included in any decision like this.

35. Should DNR permit and regulate all hunting contests to control wanton waste, and carcass dumping

Currently Wisconsin does not require a permit for or otherwise regulate hunting contest where promoters give out prizes for individuals or teams that bring in the largest or highest number, or weight of animals. Wisconsin does require a permit for and regulate some fishing contests, where incentives, prizes, points or money are awarded. Due to the growing popularity and size of these contests, there is a growing concern among sportsmen and non-hunters alike that there should be permits and regulations in place to insure proper use of animals, and proper disposal of “unfit for use” animals and their parts.

35. Do you support the Conservation Congress work with the DNR and legislature to develop a permitting and regulating process for hunting contests, similar to what they already do for fishing contests? YES

Regulating these contests is important to reduce or eliminate any ecological damage and impact they cause—currently, there are no laws that do so.

36. Funding Lower Chippewa River Parcels

Various land parcels along the Lower Chippewa River have been offered for sale to the State of Wisconsin by Xcel Energy. Several such parcels lie within current boundary of the Tiffany State Wildlife Area and provide key public access points into Tiffany. Other parcels of interest adjoin portions of the Lower Chippewa River State Natural Area and under Xcel Energy ownership these parcels have remained open to public hunting and recreation for decades. These land areas include rare habitats critical to various plant and wildlife species. Habitat types include oxbow floodplains, forest, riparian and upland barrens, grasslands, and sand prairie. Approximately 300 acres have already been preserved, however, there are additional parcels totaling approximately 760 acres and have been offered for sale to Landmark Conservancy. Under Landmark’s ownership parcels would remain open to the public for hunting, fishing, trapping, hiking, cross country skiing, and outdoor use. Public support for described purchase has been widespread and inclusive of The Wisconsin Conservation Congress, The Lower Chippewa River Alliance, the National Wild Turkey Federation, Mondovi Conservation Club, Dairyland Power Cooperative, the Prairie Enthusiasts, the Lower Chippewa Invasives Partnership, Alma Rod and Gun Club, Buffalo County Conservation Alliance, Dunn County Fish & Game Association, Alliance of Dunn County Conservation and Sports Clubs; and/plus adjacent county boards and township boards.

36. Do you support the State of Wisconsin identifying funds available to purchase of the remaining 760 acres? YES

This includes habitat for diverse wildlife species, and should be protected from development.

39. Pass the Recovering America Wildlife Act

Similar to the rest of the country, Wisconsin has 417 “At Risk” nongame fish and wildlife species, that, unless population declines are reversed, will become endangered and threatened. The major reason for these population declines is loss of habitat. A large bipartisan coalition of Senators and Representatives in the current Congress is reintroducing Recovering America’s Wildlife Act (RAWA), which will dedicate $1.4 billion nationwide to address this critical need. The bill implements the recommendation of national business and conservation leaders that funds be allocated to conserve the Species of Greatest Conservation Need identified in State Wildlife Action Plans. The legislation will allocate new funding to each state similar to how PittmanRobertson (wildlife) and Dingell-Johnson (fisheries) funds are distributed. The funds will be managed through the Wisconsin’s State Wildlife Grant program with our current share increasing from $1 million a year to $20 million. Wisconsin’s 2015-2025 Wildlife Action Plan, which sets the priorities for the grant program, was developed by a broad group of state conservation groups including the Wisconsin Conservation Congress and other sporting organizations. Wisconsin’s plan designates as Species of Greatest Conservation Need 140 bird, mammal, fish and herp species and over 300 species of insects and invertebrates. Examples include monarch butterflies, bats, Sharp-tailed Grouse, Lake Sturgeon and Ornate Box Turtles. Sportsmen and women recognize that increased habitat for Species of Greatest Conservation Need will benefit game species.

39. Do you support having all of Wisconsin’s Congressional delegation support the passage of Recovering America’s Wildlife Act in this session? YES

This bill will crucially invest money in the conservation and protection of wildlife and critical habitats that are at-risk.

42. Modifying Wisconsin Constitution to Increase the Uses of Boating Registration Fees

In the past several years there have been multiple resolutions passed by the Conservation Congress that have called for legislation to expand the use of boat registration fees for improving watercraft access and for controlling invasive species in lakes and streams. While such resolutions have had strong WCC support, legislation has not been introduced because a 1973 Wisconsin Supreme Court case, State v. Jackman, interpreted Article IX, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution that states that Wisconsin lakes and streams “…shall be common highways and forever free…without any tax, impost or duty therefor”. The Supreme Court held that under the quoted language, Wisconsin could only use boat registration fees for boating safety purposes such as boat registration and boating safety enforcement. This resolution supports an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution which would also narrowly allow boating registration fees passed by the Legislature to be used for boating access and invasive species control purposes. These purposes would benefit boating use of Wisconsin lakes and streams.

42. Should the Conservation Congress work with the Department and the Legislature to adopt a Wisconsin Constitutional Amendment to allow boating registration fees to be used for boating access and invasive species control in addition to boating safety? YES

Invasive species can outcompete native species, which impact the ecosystem of numerous kinds of birds that make their homes around lakes, rivers, and streams.

44. Ban dogs from hunting wolves in Wisconsin

Dogs hunting wolves wasn’t anticipated following wolf delisting in January 2012. Dogs are run through wolf territories despite WDNR alerts, resulting in dogs and wolves getting injured and killed. Hound hunting, (six hunting hounds per wolf) will force harassed wolves to alter their behavior to perceive dogs as a threat when their territories are invaded, often deadly to both species. Exhausted wolves, harassed by hounds for six-months can’t hunt, care for young or protect territory. Wisconsin anticruelty laws prohibit canine fighting. The scientific community majority and hunters agree that dogs hunting wolves is not necessary to have a successful hunt. Hound hunting is proven to be disruptive to wolves causing a dramatic increase in wolf conflicts and wolf depredation/compensation payments that could better be spent on other WDNR conservation efforts. Depredation monies should not be paid for hunting hounds being put at risk. Wolves were relisted as endangered (December 2014). Congress may take legislative action to permanently delist the wolf, returning management to Wisconsin which allows hound hunting of wolves, NOT advised by wolf experts.

44. Would you support banning the use of dogs from hunting wolves in Wisconsin should wolves get delisted again? YES

This practice may violate a Wisconsin State Statute which prohibits instigating fights between animals. Additionally, “hound hunting” can have a negative impact on other wildlife.

45. End All Killing Contests

Wildlife killing contests promote indiscriminate killing of native wildlife with the use of calls, hounds, and high-tech tools. 40+ Wisconsin contests have been identified via fliers and social media; annual Moondog Madness being the largest. Petitions, billboards, LTEs, and more recently undercover contest video footage have raised public awareness and support for ending these events. In response, organizers now operate in secret using private forums, code words, undisclosed weigh-in locations, and virtual video check ins. Cash and prizes, including weapons, award teams killing the most, biggest, smallest coyote, fox, bobcat, rabbit, and more. A ban on contests would not impact lethal take of coyote for livestock protection, or any form of hunting including fishing derbies and "Big Buck" competitions. The DNR does not monitor/regulate contests; they are not required to respond to hounds at large or trespassing on private land. Wanton cruelty and waste, and illegal disposal of carcasses on public land have been reported to and documented by WIDNR (e.g., 5/2018 Morgan Falls area, Ashland County; 4/2019 Old HW 2, Bayfield County; 2/2017 Shiocton). Contest photos of mutilated, bullet-ridden furs indicate many pelts are useless. Increasing support for this resolution shows hunters and non hunters alike do not endorse indiscriminate killing for fun, prizes, and cash. This divisiveness over contests is evident on social media; many hunters express concern that public support for traditional, ethical, humane, fair chase hunting is at stake. 7 states have banned competition killing, all citing 70 conservation scientists’ 2018 findings that indiscriminate killing serves no effective management tool.

45. Do you support the Conservation Congress working with the WDNR to develop and support a ban on all wildlife killing contests? YES

These unregulated contests do not have the claimed effect of reducing animal populations, and there are numerous concerns that they have additional negative effects on ecosystems.

Citizen resolutions (By county)

Numerous citizen resolutions have been submitted across the state and are voted on by county. If your county of residence includes any of the following resolutions, please consider:

Restricting the use of lead in ammunition and tackle: Lead poisoning, caused by accidental ingestion of hunting and fishing supplies, is a major death sentence for numerous birds in Wisconsin, including Bald Eagles, Common Loons, and more.
Opposing Sandhill Crane hunting: Learn more about our stance here.
Supporting the integrity of the Nelson-Knowles Stewardship Program: This crucially funds protection and conservation of Wisconsin lands.
Providing funds for Wisconsin farmers for non-lethal predator prevention programs: Crop depredation can often be prevented through non-lethal means, while killing may have opposite the intended effect.
Reducing contamination in drinking water: Safe water is crucial for our communities.
Avoiding new fossil fuel infrastructure: Reducing dependency on fossil fuels is an important move for our communities, climate, and environment.