Friday, January 24, 2014

DNR Wants To Allow Off-Leash Dogs During Hunts In State Parks

[Updated} The Wisconsin DNR, under the direction of Scott Walker appointees, has already opened state parks to hunting and trapping but now wants rule changes that will further turn state parks away from hiking, birding, photography and general recreation -to hunting interests by allowing the use of off-leash hunting dogs.

Further complicating the rule approval process: public comments end today at 5:00 p.m., and DNR documents give different accounts of where the new off-leash dog permissions will extend.

This information is contained in a DNR Submittal Notice on the proposed rule change to The Legislative Study Council as the proposal was being drafted:

These rules expand an exemption from the state park leash law for hunters’ dogs actively engaged in hunting from three named parks under current rules to any areas where hunting is allowed. 
The public comment on the proposal to add the off-leash dog permission under Wisconsin Act 168, approved in 2011, ends at 5:00 p.m. Thursday, so here is how and where to direct your comments:
Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Scott Loomans, Department of Natural Resources, PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707-7921 or by email Comments may be submitted until Jan. 24, 2014.
Further posted DNR information about the rule change and comment period is, here.

Note at that link the DNR says the expanded off-leash hunting dog permission will be extended to only three state parks, but the submittal to the Legislative Council says from three parks to "any areas where hunting is allowed."

Here is what is at the link, above:
The permanent rules will include all of the same hunting and trapping rules included in the emergency rules and will include some additional changes such as eliminating the spring state parkturkey management zones [PDF] , and allowing hunting dogs to be off leash for dogs actively engaged in hunting at three state parks.
Why the contradiction from the same agency - - three parks vs. "any areas" - - in its official documentation about something so fundamentally significant? 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

This could be a bad and dangerous thing.