Another way to help our deer herds

cantkillathing

Very Active Member
Messages
1,462
I wasn't going to bring this one up, but due to a response from horsehunter on the dedicated hunter program I decided to put up for discussion one of my major complaints.

First of all I want to tell you that I have family that also owns a 5000 acre farm, it also gets hammered by the deer and elk.

Now this is my complaint, the land owners don't want the deer or elk on their property because they cause damage, but they contradict themselves, do they allow anyone on there property to hunt during the seasons, no, do they want free tags, yes, do they want more tags, yes, if they don't get there tags they use threats, like I will shoot all the deer and elk on the property then, so the DWR gives in and gives 100 more doe tags. Now what on earth are we doing this for, the deer and elk were here first, if the landowner wont allow hunters on his property to help the cause, why are the DWR giving them tags. I think that the DWR needs to go to the legislature and get a law passed stating to all land owners, that if you want help to remove the wildlife from your property you have to allow any public hunter access to your property, then if the land owner doesn't want that then it is tough luck the deer and elk stay. I know they do this because, like I said my family has 5000 acres of farm, and my uncle who runs it does just that. I could bet that the DWR gives up to 500 to 1000 deperdation tags a year, that is a lot of deer. I also seen a land owner use his threats and shot 150 head of deer off his land, he should have been charged with poaching and his land should have been taken from him.
Now this might not be the answer but why are the DWR putting up with this, and why are we as hunters allowing this, I think that landowners shouldn't get what they want, its up to the DWR to manage. Start charging them with poaching, and tell them to quite there complaining about the deer and elk, they just want a bull tag or something they really aren't hurting and as long as we keep allowing it, it will continue to go on.

But what do you guys think?

Horsehunter, like I said I feel your pain about the sorry work the dedicated hunters performed on your farm, next time tell the DWR and let them know that it wasn't built good enough or the workers sucked. But dont complain about the program, because what have you done to help the wildlife, and don't say that you give enough by having them eat your hay. The deer eat my garden each year, I don't ask for tags,
 
>I
>think that the DWR needs
>to go to the legislature
>and get a law passed
>stating to all land owners,
>that if you want help
>to remove the wildlife from
>your property you have to
>allow any public hunter access
>to your property, then if
>the land owner doesn't want
>that then it is tough
>luck the deer and elk
>stay. I know they do
>this because, like I said
>my family has 5000 acres
>of farm, and my uncle
>who runs it does just
>that.

What on earth is wrong with owning your own property and wanting to keep and the damn "yahoos" the hell off? I mean seriously is there anyone here at MM who doesnt dream of owning your own chunk of land with deer and elk on it, having it as your own retreat? You want to then be forced to allow people to come on? Give me a break!

If I get lucky in this life, after busting my a$$ to earn enough money to buy such a piece of property no damn way in hell do I want anyone telling me I gotta let people come on and do what they want.


> I could bet
>that the DWR gives up
>to 500 to 1000 deperdation
>tags a year, that is
>a lot of deer.
>I also seen a land
>owner use his threats and
>shot 150 head of deer
>off his land, he should
>have been charged with poaching
>and his land should have
>been taken from him.

While I dont agree with landowners doing it, they do legally have the right. Instead of comming off the handle and saying he should have been charged with poaching you spend the effort to get the law changed. THEN after he does something illegal you can complain.

>Now this might not be the
>answer but why are the
>DWR putting up with this,
>and why are we as
>hunters allowing this, I think
>that landowners shouldn't get what
>they want, its up to
>the DWR to manage. Start
>charging them with poaching, and
>tell them to quite there
>complaining about the deer and
>elk, they just want a
>bull tag or something they
>really aren't hurting and as
>long as we keep allowing
>it, it will continue to
>go on.

To counter this, seriously whats so wrong with giving out an extra bull tag? I mean if people arent hunting it anyway its not like its taking a bull away from some other hunter. I've mentioned several times the min size of a CWMU ought to be reduced, there are alot of properties out there that could then qualify offering more hunting for everyone else.

>But what do you guys think?

I am more concerned with landowners getting too frustrated at their rights as property owners getting trampled on, saying "Fuk it" and selling the property to a developer.

>Horsehunter, like I said I feel
>your pain about the sorry
>work the dedicated hunters performed
>on your farm, next time
>tell the DWR and let
>them know that it wasn't
>built good enough or the
>workers sucked. But dont complain
>about the program, because what
>have you done to help
>the wildlife, and don't say
>that you give enough by
>having them eat your hay.
> The deer eat my
>garden each year, I don't
>ask for tags,

Do the deer / elk eat several thousand dollars worth of carrots? Farmers are BARELY surviving atm and every dollar counts. I've seen what elk can do to pasture and alfalfa fields, it IS a problem and compensating the landowner via tags is a VERY viable solution.

If we followed your idea you are removing most of the reason people own alot of ground like this... and with no reason to own it, it gets sold and developed.


-DallanC
 
cankillathing, I respect your opinions and views and it shows that you look at both sides of the coin. You asked for opinions so I'm gonna give you mine. Here in North East Nevada we have open range just like most of the West does. In this neck of the woods, when you move to the outskirts of town and put a house out there it is YOUR responsibility to keep the ranchers cows out of your yard and your hay. It is up to the home owner to build a fence adequate enough to keep out the cattle. And yes there are guidelines and specifications set by the state to decide what an adequate fence is. I totally agree with this and do not think that the rancher should be liable for your property if his cows get on it and damage it. After all, if you want to live out there among the cows then protect your property.
So this brings me to my point. If a rancher chooses to live among the wildlife then why does he think that he should have a different set of rules. They should have to build their owne damn fence to keep out the critters. If you can't cope with the problems that come with the territory of living on a ranch then move to the city!!! I am on the ranchers side as far as wolves and bears and mustangs go. The government has got your hands tied and you can't hardly protect your property from these animals and I do not think it is fair to the rancher. So maybe the rancher has taken the opinion that he can at least get some compensation in another area.
I am against landowner tags. I do not agree with a landowner being issued a bunch of tags so that he can sell them to the public. NOBODY should be able to sell a tag including outfitters. Only Game and Fish should be able to receive any monetary value due to the fact that this is how they get a lot of their funds to operate. I do however believe that a landowner should be able to charge a fee to people who want to hunt his property.
As far as horsehunters complaint in another thread about poor quality of work being performed by the incentive program I say just be happy that you got the fence material for free. And if you need help building fence, I would be happy to volunteer some time to help you build it. Of course I'm not gonna travel across country to do it but building your fence is your responsibility anyways. Well, that is my opinion. fatrooster.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-05 AT 11:08AM (MST)[p]> I am against landowner tags.
>I do not agree with
>a landowner being issued a
>bunch of tags so that
>he can sell them to
>the public. NOBODY should be
>able to sell a tag
>including outfitters. Only Game and
>Fish should be able to
>receive any monetary value due
>to the fact that this
>is how they get a
>lot of their funds to
>operate. I do however believe

Ummm thats how it works in Utah though. The landowner is only given a voucher that the hunter then takes to the F&G who then sells hunting tag to him. The landowner never sees the actual tag until its been purchased (depredation tags) nor takes any money in the sale of said tag. The state gets 100% of the tags sale fee.

The landowner is free to charge whatever he wants for a tresspass fee though.


-DallanC
 
in response to DallanC,

I agree who wouldn't want a peace of property to have there own little retreat, I would love it to death to have my own property, I would even plant and grow what ever I could to attract the wildlife, it is my dream, but I would say that I wouldn't want anyone on my property either, but I am saying if the land owner want the deer and elk removed then they need to allow access to there property, or shut the hell up. I wouldn't complain if the deer and elk were on a piece of property that I own, I would be glad they were there so then I can hunt them with out having 3000 other hunters there.
I think your taking what I said out of context, this should only apply to those that are complaining of the wildlife on your property, they should allow access.

I agree that the elk and deer eat thousands of dallars worth of alfalfa but like I said if you don't want them then allow hunters to access your property. Or like someone stated build a fence.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom