Assembly committee holds hearing on crane hunting bill

The return of the sandhill crane to Wisconsin is a conservation success, but now the state needs to manage the population and the crop damage the birds can cause. (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources)
A Wisconsin Assembly committee held a public hearing Tuesday on a bill that would require the state to hold an annual hunt of sandhill cranes.
The sandhill crane was once nearly extinct and its recovery is seen as a conservation success story. Similar to the return of the wolf, the growth of the sandhill crane population has caused a long running political debate in Wisconsin. For years, Republicans in the Legislature have been pushing for a sandhill crane hunt — arguing the opening of recreational opportunities would benefit the state’s hunting industry and advocating for eating the birds’ meat.
The proposal this session stems from a legislative study committee commissioned last summer which examined how to mitigate damage caused by the birds to the state’s farm fields and the possibility of holding a hunt. Estimates say that each year the birds cause almost $2 million in crop damage, mostly to corn seeds that are eaten before they can sprout.
In the initial version of the bill proposed by the study committee, a number of provisions were included that would have directly addressed the crop damage. If a sandhill crane hunt is authorized, that would allow farmers to access money through an existing Department of Natural Resources damage abatement program, but otherwise all the farm-specific provisions have been removed from the version of the bill now being considered by the Assembly.
If a bird is frequently damaging a farmer’s crops, a depredation permit is obtainable from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, however federal law requires that the bird’s carcass not be consumed.
Rep. Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc), the bill’s author, said the bill is a “well thought out proposal to relieve farmers and promote new opportunities for hunters.”
But Democrats on the committee and critics of the bill questioned why the specific farmer assistance programs were cut out, how a hunt would affect the crane population and how much establishing a hunt would cost the DNR.
Rep. Vincent Miresse (D-Stevens Point) noted that the Republicans were simultaneously arguing that holding a hunt wouldn’t significantly impact the state’s crane population and that holding a hunt would help mitigate the crop damage caused by the birds.
“If it’s not going to impact the population very much, then how do we protect farmers’ investment in seed and corn sprouts and potatoes and cranberries, if we’re not going to actually impact the population to the benefit of the farmer,” Miresse said.
Taylor Finger, the DNR’s game bird specialist, said in his testimony that opening the existing crop damage abatement program up to sandhill crane damage without adding additional funds to the program would result in “worse outcomes for farmers seeking assistance.”
Republicans on the committee largely questioned the testimony of sandhill crane researchers. Anne Lacy, director of eastern flyway programs at the Baraboo-based International Crane Foundation, said she is concerned about holding a hunt in Wisconsin because it is one of the few places on the continent where sandhill cranes breed.
“I don’t think there is a [population] number that justifies a hunt,” Lacy said. “There are many states that hunt sandhill cranes, and they do it successfully. They’ve been managed for years, including this population. But Wisconsin is a breeding state, so that puts a different spin on a hunting season … So it’s not so much a number. It is how a hunt affects this bird because of its ecology.”
In an extended back and forth in which he raised his voice, Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) pushed Lacy to say she is supportive of sandhill crane hunts elsewhere.
“All right, so I catch you dodging me, so therefore you do not personally support a hunt in any other state,” Sortwell said.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.