State legislators this summer will lead a committee to review and recommend options for sandhill crane management in Wisconsin, possibly to include a hunting season for the species.

The Legislative Council Study Committee on Sandhill Cranes is slated to begin meeting in July, said committee chair Rep. Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc).

The group “shall examine population trends and determine whether any changes to state law would effectively address the incidence and consequences of crop damage caused by sandhill cranes in this state,” according to the committee description.

Its charge includes recommending “legislation to manage the population of sandhill cranes and address the agricultural impact of sandhill cranes.”

As part of its review of policy options, the committee may consider whether the Department of Natural Resources should seek federal approval to establish a hunting season for sandhill cranes.

But Tittl said it would be a “deep dive” and also consider non-hunting options to provide funding to farmers suffering crop losses from cranes.

In addition to Tittl, the sandhill crane study committee will include vice chair Sen. Romaine Quinn (R-Cameron), Rep. Dave Considine (D-Baraboo), Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) and likely eight public members, mostly representatives of conservation, wildlife and farming groups.

Tittl said he reviewed applications and recommended eight public members on May 21; the applications were passed along for review and likely approval by the Republican-led Wisconsin Joint Legislative Council.

The sandhill crane committee is one of five Legislative Council Study Committees scheduled for this summer. A handful of such committees, selected by the Joint Legislative Council, are held in even-numbered years.

Sandhill cranes have increased substantially in number in Wisconsin in recent decades. In autumn 2022 61,098 sandhills were counted in Wisconsin, part of 107,140 birds in the eastern population of the species, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The eastern population count was conducted in 10 states and two provinces of Canada. Wisconsin forms the core of the eastern population’s breeding range and typically has the largest number of cranes of any state or province in the region.

In recent years cranes have caused about $1 million annually in crop damage in Wisconsin, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Most occurs in spring on newly planted corn but potato and bean growers also report losses later in the year.

However the state currently has no program to compensate farmers for losses due to sandhill cranes.

The sandhill crane is currently protected in the state. In addition to approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a hunting season would require the Legislature to pass and governor to sign a bill allowing a sandhill crane hunt in Wisconsin.

Under current laws, farmers who incur crop damage can shoot sandhills on their property after obtaining a federal permit but cannot eat or otherwise utilize the carcasses. About 1,000 cranes are killed on federal depredation permits each year in Wisconsin, according the USDA.

If state law were changed to allow a sandhill crane hunting season, farmers would be eligible for compensation for crane-caused crop damage.

Three states in the Mississippi Flyway hold sandhill crane hunting seasons during fall or winter: Alabama, Kentucky and Tennessee. In the 2021-22 hunting season, the states reported a harvest of 835 sandhills, according to the USFWS.

However the Wisconsin Legislature has failed to advance two bills that sought to allow a sandhill hunt, one in 2011 and the other introduced by Tittl in 2021. The lack of support for the bills is notable as they where authored by Republicans in Republican-controlled Legislatures.

A study conducted in December by the University of Wisconsin Survey Center found 17% of state residents would support a sandhill crane hunting season while 48% oppose the idea.

The work, funded by the International Crane Foundation in Baraboo and the UW-Madison Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, was the first controlled, science-based look at public support for crane hunting in the state. It polled 2,769 members of the UWSC’s WisconSays survey panel.

The panel is chosen to match Wisconsin’s population in terms of economic status, education, race, gender, political leanings, party affiliation, place of residence and other factors. It was launched in 2023 and has panelists in all 72 Wisconsin counties.

A statewide advisory question at the 2017 Wisconsin Conservation Congress spring hearings, an open process and not a controlled study, showed narrow support (2,349 voting yes and 2,049 no) for a sandhill hunt. The Wisconsin Waterfowl Association and Wisconsin Wildlife Federation are on record as supporting a crane hunt.

The Wisconsin Corn Growers Association, Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation and Wisconsin Potato and Vegetable Growers Association were also registered in favor of the 2021 sandhill crane hunting bill.

Animal Wellness Action and the Wisconsin chapter of Sierra Club were registered against the proposal.

It’s unclear whether political support among legislators has changed over the last couple years with regard to a potential crane hunting season.

Other items the committee will likely review: Would a limited fall hunting season reduce sandhill-caused crop damage? How much funding would a hunting season raise to support farmers? How much might be raised to support farmers from other potential funding sources?

Dave Scott, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service representative, said based on recent population levels Wisconsin could offer a maximum of about 5,100 sandhill crane hunting permits, but would likely offer fewer if an experimental season were held.

Hunting would be by special permit and the season could run for a maximum of 60 days between Sept. 1 and Jan. 31. Further, any sandhill hunting proposal would have to address concerns for whooping cranes and be designed to try to limit or avoid conflicts with the endangered birds.

Tittl, a hunter and representative of a district with a substantial number of agricultural producers, said he’d been following issues related to cranes for at least 10 years and sought out the opportunity to chair the sandhill study committee.

“I’ve been hearing from farmers in my area who are suffering crop damage,” Tittl said. “And right now we’ve got no program to help them.”

Tittl said the study committee would allow a comprehensive look at all aspects of the sandhill crane population and potential management tactics, including non-lethal means such as Avipel treatment of corn kernels and potential funding sources not related to a hunting season.

The committee will be staffed by attorneys or analysts and an administrative assistant from the non-partisan Legislative Council staff.

Tittl said he expects the committee to be “very balanced.”

“I didn’t select the public members so it would be a slam dunk,” Tittl said. “If we come to the end of this and a hunt doesn’t seem right or necessary or the way to go, I’m OK with that. I’m a hunter but I’m not going into this with any pre-determined outcome. I want us to come up with the best possible solutions.”

Public members not only participate in meetings and provide their perspective on the issues but also vote on the proposals intended to resolve the issues. As such the views of public members can determine committee recommendations.

Public members are not paid for their participation on the study committees but are entitled to receive reimbursement for certain travel expenses, including mileage, parking, meals, and overnight stays, if necessary.

Because the selections weren’t finalized during the interview, Tittl didn’t release names of prospective public members.

He said the committee is likely to meet four times, with the first in July, and to have its recommendations finalized by early November.

Tittl said he hoped the first committee meeting would be a field trip to Horicon Marsh.

Smith: Back from the brink, whooping cranes inspire awe but still need help

Among the first news outlets to pick up on the recent unveiling of the $100 million Wisconsin Investment Fund were two outside of the state – the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in Washington state and U.S. News & World Report. Both ran an Associated Press story on the news within hours.

As I mentioned to those who gathered at Madison’s Forward BIOLABS for the announcement by Gov. Tony Evers and others, that’s a big reason why the public-private fund is not an end in the state’s journey to build a more vibrant technology economy, but a new and significant beginning.

Like 49 other states, Wisconsin received money through the U.S. Treasury’s State Small Business Credit Initiative, which was authorized by the American Rescue Plan Act. Each state was free to tailor its program to a large degree, and Wisconsin chose to put nearly two-thirds of its allotment into a fund that would require private venture capital firms to match the SSBCI money, dollar-for-dollar.

The result is the biggest single public-private venture capital initiative in Wisconsin’s history, and a breakthrough that builds on what came before it.

Fourteen venture firms bid with the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. to be a part of the program and five have been selected so far; a sixth private fund participant is pending. The first five, with a total of $45 million in state commitments, are:

• HealthX Ventures, Madison, $15 million. HealthX invests largely in the digital health sector but also in other health care innovations.
• Venture Investors LLC, Madison, $12 million. Venture Investors invests primarily in health care innovation, such as therapeutics, medical devices, health IT and diagnostics.
• Serra Ventures, Champaign, Ill., $7 million. Serra Ventures invests nationally, especially in the agriculture and food technology space. Some past Serra investments have been in Wisconsin companies.
• NVNG, Madison, $6 million. NVNG (short for “nothing ventured, nothing gained”) invests broadly in Wisconsin tech sectors including health.
• Idea Fund of La Crosse, $5 million. Part of the Badger Fund of Funds network, the Idea Fund of La Crosse invests broadly in the Upper Midwest in sectors such as information technology, health IT, data analytics, supply chain, agriculture, manufacturing and financial services.

The mix reflects the overall goal of the fund, which is to build on existing and emerging technology startups, but also to move beyond the traditional research hubs to find companies and entrepreneurs in underserved places.

That’s one reason why Serra Ventures is in the mix, because it’s familiar with spotting strong deals in the agriculture and food tech space (24 current portfolio companies) and has plenty of sales or other “exits” to demonstrate market knowledge.

Another focus will be bio-health, which has long been a Wisconsin tech strength in regions such as Madison and Milwaukee, but increasingly in cities such as Eau Claire. Last year, the U.S. Economic Development Agency recognized Wisconsin as a “regional technology hub” for personalized medicine and related technologies. That could make the state eligible for up to $75 million in federal funding to accelerate growth.

While the announcement was made by Democrat Evers, it’s worth noting that Wisconsin’s efforts to build a stronger tech-based economy have been bipartisan for decades.

The enactment of investor tax credits in 2005 was led by the late state Sen. Ted Kanavas, R-Brookfield, and then-Commerce Secretary Cory Nettles, an appointee of Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. The creation of the Badger Fund of Funds in 2013 came during the tenure of then-Gov. Scott Walker with help from both sides of the aisle in the Legislature. Changes to both the investor tax credit program (Qualified New Business Venture credits, also administered through WEDC) and the Badger fund in recent years have also required bipartisan agreement.

Within the Legislature itself, the bipartisan and informal Tech Caucus has both Republican and Democratic leaders and members, further demonstrating that economic growth need not be a partisan squabble.

The $100 million Wisconsin Investment Fund comes with no guarantees, as most young companies fail in time. Those that succeed, however, often do so on a scale that spreads prosperity well beyond company walls. Investors outside Wisconsin will notice this initiative – and perhaps bring their own expertise and money to bear.

Tom Still is president of the Wisconsin Technology Council.

The state’s bar and restaurant industry overall has had a strong recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, but that recovery hasn’t been even across the sector.

That’s according to a new report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum, which examined employment, sales and the lingering impacts of the pandemic. 

While bars and restaurants were among the businesses most disrupted by the pandemic in 2020, the report found that employment in the industry has returned to pre-pandemic levels and state sales tax revenues from restaurants and bars have returned to its pre-pandemic trend line.

Kristine Hillmer, president and chief executive officer for the Wisconsin Restaurant Association, said the health of the industry is important because restaurants are the “backbone of Main Street,” serving as a vital social setting.

“They are a gathering place for busy families who need a quick bite to eat,” she said. “They’re a gathering place where you want to celebrate or mourn, or gather together with your friends just to socialize. It really is a unique thing for many communities who really want to have a vibrant town.”

This February, the industry had more employees than it did in the same month of 2020, according to the study. Last summer months, however, restaurants and bars did not reach their pre-pandemic high of 219,200 workers from August 2019.

“The summer of 2023, the numbers were still a little bit lower than summer 2019. But we could see that fully returned by this summer,” said Joe Peterangelo, a senior researcher for Wisconsin Policy Forum. “But overall, I’d say the employment numbers situation is generally pretty positive.”

While restaurants have returned to their pre-pandemic trend line in terms of sales tax revenues generated, many continue to operate at limited hours and fewer days open than they had prior to 2020, the report states. 

Because inflation of wholesale food prices has led to higher menu prices, the report said its likely restaurants are earning a similar amount of revenue as before the pandemic with fewer total transactions and smaller orders, the study said.

“Even if the sales have rebounded, there’s still probably fewer sales happening overall,” Peterangelo said. “We don’t have numbers to show that.”

Certain types of restaurants continue to struggle, according to the report.

Hillmer with the restaurant association said mid-priced sit down restaurants have been more impacted by inflation than those in fine dining or fast food.

“Those that want to go out for that high-end steak dinner or seafood dinner are likely not to necessarily balk at some of the higher prices that are baked into the new menu prices because of inflation,” Hillmer said. “However, if you’ve got a family of four and you’re on a tight budget, and you’re making that decision to go out to a restaurant, you may be choosing to go out less or you may be choosing to have (a) lower priced item.”

Despite those challenges, the policy forum found the number of bars and restaurants in Wisconsin has recovered. The report says the state had more of those establishments in the third quarter of 2023 than in the same period of 2019.

But the number of bars in Wisconsin, classified as “drinking places” by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, has been declining over the last few decades, the report said. 

In 2022, Wisconsin had 20.3 percent fewer bars than in 2003, the study said. It did not have annual data for 2023.

“We do have almost as many people employed in bars as we did 20 years ago — it’s only 2.6 percent fewer people in 2022 than in 2003,” Peterangelo said. “What that means to me is it kind of supports that theory that we’ve lost small bars and we have larger establishments now that are employing almost as many people overall as they were 20 years ago.”

While restaurants continue to face challenges, the industry’s overall outlook is much better than it was in 2020 or 2021, the report said.

Hillmer said she’s “cautiously optimistic” about the future of the state’s eateries, especially if inflation continues to cool. 

“As inflation slows down, there’s going to be more of an evening out of what (disposable) income is available,” she said. “When there’s more income, there’s always that desire to go out, eat and have a good time.”