Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2009 8:43:27 GMT -5
Actually, the deer belong to the the people of the state and those who buy a license and tag to hunt those deer. The later group is out numbered by thsoe who don't want the deer killed by any means.
A lot of those public land deer live on Federally owned lands, and are not "owned" by the state, only managed by the state.
As for as leasing goes, and outfitters, there is no difference in a group of guys leasing a property and a group of guys having exclusive rights to that property, still the number of people hunting it is controlled. The deer living on the property that you don't have premission to enter.....are they still "yours".
Quotas on NR tags would only work to limit income fo the DNR and eventually work to raise RESIDENT prices, as it has in Iowa.
|
|
|
|
Post by NON-TYPICAL on Mar 31, 2009 10:01:27 GMT -5
I look at it like when I'm in the woods this is my time, I don't want to be interrupted by people wandering through the woods while hunting public land. So if I cant find free land, I'm willing to pay to enjoy my time, not waste it! Bye no means do I have money or blessed with family wealth. I just work extra or do what it takes to assure that my time in the woods is what I'm expecting of it! So if it means a lease I'm willing to do it. I don't think anybody who has land for themselves would just like anybody to hunt it because certain people have to much. I would be all for free hunting but lets face it, it will never happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 31, 2009 10:02:20 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2009 10:11:30 GMT -5
Some of their sponsors were alerted to the incident yesterday when this came out, that most likely had a lot to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 31, 2009 10:12:47 GMT -5
......... Quotas on NR tags would only work to limit income fo the DNR and eventually work to raise RESIDENT prices, as it has in Iowa. This is not Illinois or Iowa or Kansas that is in big demand of NRs. We get less than 7,000 NRs yearly here to hunt Indiana. That is 3.1 percent of all the deer hunters in Indiana. To those that propose that we limit NRS, what would you set that draw at? 4,000? 3,000? None at all? Be careful whet you ask for as some states ARE reciprocal and they could limit their drAw to that number for Hooiser. IOW - If we set the limit at 3,000 then Illinois (or any otehr state) could say to Hoosier hunters "If your name is not drawn in the first 3,000 NR archery permits then you are out of luck". Do we really want to be greedy protectionists? Probably most of the NRs have relatives in Indiana that they come to hunt with. We want to exclude them? |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 10:22:07 GMT -5
Actually, the deer belong to the the people of the state and those who buy a license and tag to hunt those deer. The later group is out numbered by those who don't want the deer killed by any means. A lot of those public land deer live on Federally owned lands, and are not "owned" by the state, only managed by the state. Yes they do but by the strictest letter of the law we who own those deer allow NRs to hunt our deer .Secondly at this time the NR moneys to the state is minimal at best. Also yes alot of the deer are on federal lands managed by the state but just as many if not more are on true state owned ground with overwhelming majority are simply on privet ground. As far as the deer being on property I do not have permission on they are still everyones deer in Indiana in general language "thus the state mandated limits and season still applies" ,that said at the time they are on yours or my land they belong souly to you at that time since no one else has any right to them or your land !Here is an example of that in the form of Indiana game law! 1- if a hunter shoots an animal on the property that they hunt and it travels to an adjoining property you are required by law to ask permission to enter and retrieve the animal on that property .The land owner dose not have to allow you on to it however and the CO or any law enforcement officer can not force the property owner to allow entrance or relinquish the animal .Literally even though I would never ever do it the land owner may take that animal as theirs and check it in if they wish or simply let it rot right where it fell .It sucks but it is they way it is.I know hunters who have been turned away and even call the sheriff and were told that at the point the owner said no to both the hunter and sheriff , the sheriff said the disscusion was over they could do nothing more for the hunter! |
|
|
|
Post by tickman1961 on Mar 31, 2009 10:26:28 GMT -5
I see unethical people in all walks of life...so why penalize everyone because of it.
Similar arguements are made by gun control advocates whose laws only penalize law abidding citizens.
Indiana outfitters are Indiana residents subject to the same hoops everyone else has to jump thru to hunt, pay real estate and income taxes, pay expenses on their operations. The outfitter is likely paying a lease on the private ground they hunt and in reality are not making the "big money" you talk about unless they bust their butts to be successful. There is no such thing as easy money for your typical outfitter.
|
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 10:26:56 GMT -5
I look at it like when I'm in the woods this is my time, I don't want to be interrupted by people wandering through the woods while hunting public land. So if I cant find free land, I'm willing to pay to enjoy my time, not waste it! Bye no means do I have money or blessed with family wealth. I just work extra or do what it takes to assure that my time in the woods is what I'm expecting of it! So if it means a lease I'm willing to do it. I don't think anybody who has land for themselves would just like anybody to hunt it because certain people have to much. I would be all for free hunting but lets face it, it will never happen. Agreed totally I never suggested that property owners give up any ownership rights to their land or allowing or not allowing anyone to hunt there.If you are leasing land to hunt here and are a resident and are not selling hunts that is different than leasing up thousands of acres to displace hunters that live here to sell some hunting for money . Most of this was directed at state owned public land that we as residents of this state payed for and continue to pay for that NRs payed nothing for . And the leasing of giant chunks of land by outfitters that take away habitat from hundreds of local hunters every year Knowing that this is all the land that many have to hunt I believe it is a slap in their face when outfitters take dozens of hunters to that land that payed nothing but a license fee to hunt there and displace our hunters for money!. IMHO |
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Mar 31, 2009 10:36:32 GMT -5
I'm not saying restrict property rights, just pointing out the very real problems.
Wanna hear somthing scary? Where Leasing is the Norm, all the Antis have to do is Lease up the land.
How much land could George Soros lease up...?
Just somthing to ponder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 31, 2009 10:52:44 GMT -5
Actually, the deer belong to the the people of the state and those who buy a license and tag to hunt those deer. The later group is out numbered by those who don't want the deer killed by any means. A lot of those public land deer live on Federally owned lands, and are not "owned" by the state, only managed by the state. Yes they do but by the strictest letter of the law we who own those deer allow NRs to hunt our deer .Secondly at this time the NR moneys to the state is minimal at best. Also yes alot of the deer are on federal lands managed by the state but just as many if not more are on true state owned ground with overwhelming majority are simply on privet ground. I can not find it now, but I am sure that the IDNR said that the deer in Indiana are owned by the state of Indiana, not the people of Indiana. Therefore the state is the only one that can give permission to anyone to take deer. If the deer belonged to the people then anyone can say when they want to shoot "their deer." This is like saying the governor's mansion belongs to the "people of Indiana", but go try and live there. No, they STILL belong to the state. If they belonged to you then you can shoot them anytime that you wanted to. That really has nothing to do with the deer. If your favorite hutning hat blew over on the neighbor's property he can deny you, the sheriifs and the COs access to retrieve it. Unless LEOS has a search warrant no landowner has to allow aacess to his ground for any reason to any body. It is PROPERTY RIGHTS, not deer rights.. |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 10:56:51 GMT -5
Yes they do but by the strictest letter of the law we who own those deer allow NRs to hunt our deer .Secondly at this time the NR moneys to the state is minimal at best. Also yes alot of the deer are on federal lands managed by the state but just as many if not more are on true state owned ground with overwhelming majority are simply on privet ground. I can not find it now, but I am sure that the IDNR said that the deer in Indiana are owned by the state of Indiana, not the people of Indiana. Therefore the state is the only one that can give permission to anyone to take deer. If the deer belonged to the people then anyone can say when they want to shoot "their deer." This is like saying the governor's mansion belongs to the "people of Indiana", but go try and live there. No, they STILL belong to the state. If they belonged to you then you can shoot them anytime that you wanted to. That really has nothing to do with the deer. If your favorite hunting hat blew over on the neighbor's property he can deny you, the sheriffs and the COs access to retrieve it. Unless LEOS has a search warrant no landowner has to allow access to his ground for any reason to any body. It is PROPERTY RIGHTS, not deer rights.. \ Actually Woody this time you are mistaken this was done many years ago and is on record as such because it removed them from any and all damages caused by the deer herd here .Its been this way as long as I can remember. |
|
|
|
Post by HuntMeister on Mar 31, 2009 11:42:37 GMT -5
Soooo, can someone please post the letter of the law so we can clear this who owns the deer part of the discussion up? Not meaning to be disrespectful as I am enjoying the debate.
As far as non-resi hunters, I believe alot of them are hunting with family and or friends, at least that has been my experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 31, 2009 12:15:49 GMT -5
I can not find it now, but I am sure that the IDNR said that the deer in Indiana are owned by the state of Indiana, not the people of Indiana. Therefore the state is the only one that can give permission to anyone to take deer. If the deer belonged to the people then anyone can say when they want to shoot "their deer." This is like saying the governor's mansion belongs to the "people of Indiana", but go try and live there. No, they STILL belong to the state. If they belonged to you then you can shoot them anytime that you wanted to. That really has nothing to do with the deer. If your favorite hunting hat blew over on the neighbor's property he can deny you, the sheriffs and the COs access to retrieve it. Unless LEOS has a search warrant no landowner has to allow access to his ground for any reason to any body. It is PROPERTY RIGHTS, not deer rights.. \ Actually Woody this time you are mistaken this was done many years ago and is on record as such because it removed them from any and all damages caused by the deer herd here .Its been this way as long as I can remember. If you can find a cite for it I would sure be interested in seeing it. What I was referring to was the IDNR whitetail management plan that used to be on the IDNR website. Since they revamped the site I can no longer find it . |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 12:25:05 GMT -5
Soooo, can someone please post the letter of the law so we can clear this who owns the deer part of the discussion up? Not meaning to be disrespectful as I am enjoying the debate. As far as non-resi hunters, I believe allot of them are hunting with family and or friends, at least that has been my experience. Ok here it is according to the statutes of governing taken from code 1971 . 14-2of modern Fish and wildlife code of the state of Indiana .This code still stands this date of general hunting laws and code.All this from the hard copy I have of state code & regs. The miscellaneous laws were included in our yearly regs books up till 1994 .At that point special hunt applications and check station /hunting property lists sun rise sunset tables pushed these laws out of the book yet they are still the letter of the law in Indiana. For those of you that keep everything like I do it is in all the reg pamphlet up to 1994 .I am setting here looking at the 1989 and the 1993 & 1994 copies . if this helps those of you looking for this it is also in the current Indiana Game laws code book 197114-2 as well. Wheeeew that was a long look and allot of sorting. Wild animals shall be the property of the people of the state of Indiana . [CH. 1 -2] This law is the reason for landowner lease's not needing to have or own a hunting license while hunting their land as all game on that land due to the letter of the law belongs to them .That being said the game on IN /Fed Gov land belongs to all in Indiana hunters and non alike equally .So when an animal steps off of your land to another's it belongs to the next landowner and so on . Know this though if you are hunting with permission on another's land those animals be long to the land owner first and were given to you by the landowner giving you permission to hunt .But that said we as a whole and the state on Indiana Gov . put the IDNR in charge of making the hunting laws and seasons as well as bag limits which supersede the other law and all hunters/citizens are required to fallow all game laws or they are subject these two laws that are also in the same Indiana code . 2-- Any person who takes a deer in violation of any regulation will be penalized $500.00 in addition to any other penalty he may be subject to under the law . [CH. 3-9] 3---It is unlawful for any person to fish ,hunt,trap or shoot with any firearm upon privately owned land without first securing the consent of the landowner or tenant of such land. [CH. 4-5] Its a dichotomy really because all game animals belong to all Indiana citizens singularly and as a whole . |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 12:27:34 GMT -5
\ Actually Woody this time you are mistaken this was done many years ago and is on record as such because it removed them from any and all damages caused by the deer herd here .Its been this way as long as I can remember. If you can find a cite for it I would sure be interested in seeing it. What I was referring to was the IDNR whitetail management plan that used to be on the IDNR website. Since they revamped the site I can no longer find it . I beleive like me you too Woody will have to refer to hard copy books as well as I did .The current law codes that are on the net are very long as in tens of thousands of pages .But as I posted the hard copies I can find are in my previous thread. |
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Mar 31, 2009 13:06:34 GMT -5
Soooo, can someone please post the letter of the law so we can clear this who owns the deer part of the discussion up? Not meaning to be disrespectful as I am enjoying the debate. As far as non-resi hunters, I believe alot of them are hunting with family and or friends, at least that has been my experience. Ok here it is according to the statutes of governing taken from code 1971 . 14-2of modern Fish and wildlife code of the state of Indiana .This code still stands this date of general hunting laws and code.All this from the hard copy I have of state code & regs. The miscellaneous laws were included in our yearly regs books up till 1994 .At that point special hunt applications and check station /hunting property lists sun rise sunset tables pushed these laws out of the book yet they are still the letter of the law in Indiana. For those of you that keep everything like I do it is in all the reg pamphlet up to 1994 .I am setting here looking at the 1989 and the 1993 & 1994 copies . if this helps those of you looking for this it is also in the current Indiana Game laws code book 197114-2 as well. Wheeeew that was a long look and allot of sorting. Wild animals shall be the property of the people of the state of Indiana . [CH. 1 -2] This law is the reason for landowner lease's not needing to have or own a hunting license while hunting their land as all game on that land due to the letter of the law belongs to them .That being said the game on IN /Fed Gov land belongs to all in Indiana hunters and non alike equally .So when an animal steps off of your land to another's it belongs to the next landowner and so on . Know this though if you are hunting with permission on another's land those animals be long to the land owner first and were given to you by the landowner giving you permission to hunt .But that said we as a whole and the state on Indiana Gov . put the IDNR in charge of making the hunting laws and seasons as well as bag limits which supersede the other law and all hunters/citizens are required to fallow all game laws or they are subject these two laws that are also in the same Indiana code . 2-- Any person who takes a deer in violation of any regulation will be penalized $500.00 in addition to any other penalty he may be subject to under the law . [CH. 3-9] 3---It is unlawful for any person to fish ,hunt,trap or shoot with any firearm upon privately owned land without first securing the consent of the landowner or tenant of such land. [CH. 4-5] OK... I either mis-interpretted what was in the IDNR whitetail management plan or they didn't follwo the law in their statement. NOW.... Since we put them in charge that means that they can allow NRs to hunt the "Wild animals that are the property of the people of the state of Indiana." All I am saying is be careful what you ask for in limiting NRs or charging them an arm and a leg to hunt, to hunt Indiana as a I'll bet a LOT more Indiana residents hunt out of state that we have NRs hunt our state. |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 13:38:49 GMT -5
Ok here it is according to the statutes of governing taken from code 1971 . 14-2of modern Fish and wildlife code of the state of Indiana .This code still stands this date of general hunting laws and code.All this from the hard copy I have of state code & regs. The miscellaneous laws were included in our yearly regs books up till 1994 .At that point special hunt applications and check station /hunting property lists sun rise sunset tables pushed these laws out of the book yet they are still the letter of the law in Indiana. For those of you that keep everything like I do it is in all the reg pamphlet up to 1994 .I am setting here looking at the 1989 and the 1993 & 1994 copies . if this helps those of you looking for this it is also in the current Indiana Game laws code book 197114-2 as well. Wheeeew that was a long look and allot of sorting. Wild animals shall be the property of the people of the state of Indiana . [CH. 1 -2] This law is the reason for landowner lease's not needing to have or own a hunting license while hunting their land as all game on that land due to the letter of the law belongs to them .That being said the game on IN /Fed Gov land belongs to all in Indiana hunters and non alike equally .So when an animal steps off of your land to another's it belongs to the next landowner and so on . Know this though if you are hunting with permission on another's land those animals be long to the land owner first and were given to you by the landowner giving you permission to hunt .But that said we as a whole and the state on Indiana Gov . put the IDNR in charge of making the hunting laws and seasons as well as bag limits which supersede the other law and all hunters/citizens are required to fallow all game laws or they are subject these two laws that are also in the same Indiana code . 2-- Any person who takes a deer in violation of any regulation will be penalized $500.00 in addition to any other penalty he may be subject to under the law . [CH. 3-9] 3---It is unlawful for any person to fish ,hunt,trap or shoot with any firearm upon privately owned land without first securing the consent of the landowner or tenant of such land. [CH. 4-5] OK... I either mis-interpretted what was in the IDNR whitetail management plan or they didn't follwo the law in their statement. NOW.... Since we put them in charge that means that they can allow NRs to hunt the "Wild animals that are the property of the people of the state of Indiana." All I am saying is be careful what you ask for in limiting NRs or charging them an arm and a leg to hunt, to hunt Indiana as a I'll bet a LOT more Indiana residents hunt out of state that we have NRs hunt our state. Your right Woody there likely are more I would say . That said I deep down do not want NR hunters not to come hunt here .This whole hunting thing is very emotional to all of us . I think with the virtual explosion of Indiana outfitters there dose need to be strick regulation and licensing on them . Here is what I do want is for reciprical agreements .I want outfitter langauage about "Indiana " public hunting land it is the only place that many resident hunters have to hunt .And quite frankly the should not be allowed to run outfitted hunts on thais land .Federal land well OK its everyones . We do need to look out for our own hunters .I poste this so we all would look further than our own hunting land to see that there are outfitters out there taking over public state ground the leaseing of privet land is not enough for them they are forceing off those who only have the state land to hunt . Here is a snippit from a Indiana hunting outffiters web site without any Identifieing names or locations . because people are sue happy I will protect myself in this some . ""Hunts offered on State and Private Properties We offer two different types of Whitetail Deer Hunts on State and Private Properties. The seasons run basically from October till the First of January. Guided Hunts 101 – $1,900 - These hunts are three days "" ""The Hunts will be conducted on over 30,000 acres of State and Private properties. I will provide you with maps, directions and pointers to good places to hunt. This is a great opportunity for a group of guys wanting to experience deer camp at its best. "" I will not defame this outfit but this is what I am talking about here .And there are several others it should be regulated and reined in a bit!! |
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Mar 31, 2009 13:49:24 GMT -5
[/quote] Since we put them in charge that means that they can allow NRs to hunt the "Wild animals that are the property of the people of the state of Indiana." [/quote] Yes we /they allowed NR hunting years and years ago when it was determined that our deer herd was viable enough to allow it .We collectively had our voices herd back then just as we do not at meetings .And yes NR hunting was allowed but from time to time an adjustment is needed for the residents to not be pushed to the side in the persuit of the almighty dollar .Do I really want NRs gone no.They have family and outfitters to hunt .But some slight adjustment to the current system may be in order in a few years .Lets face it with guys like Micheal Waddel killing free range 170 + buck on national TV it will not be long before this will all need to be addressed till then " Can't we all just get along  " LOL  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2009 13:56:46 GMT -5
How much land could George Soros lease up...? . The answer is the same amount that you or anyone else could lease up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2009 14:00:27 GMT -5
[ Actually Woody this time you are mistaken this was done many years ago and is on record as such because it removed them from any and all damages caused by the deer herd here .Its been this way as long as I can remember. Woody is correct. the reason the State is not liable for damages from deer is because the deer are native to the State and were actually here before there was a State. |
|
" LOL 