New Jersey Hunters banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I got this from another site that I goto alot.


The Natural Resource Commission has approved the Notice of Intended Action for Nonresident Deer Hunting. The notice contains the proposed regulations for hunting deer and includes season dates, bag limits, possession limits, shooting hours, areas open to hunting, licensing procedures, means and methods of taking, and transportation tag requirements for 2006. Now is your opportunity to make your comments on the changes described below or any other changes that you feel need to be made to the nonresident rule.

The only major change requires nonresidents that purchase an any-deer license to also purchase an antlerless-only deer license for $100. What this means is that any nonresident that obtains one of the either sex deer license will also have to purchase an antlerless license for the same zone and season. This requirement was passed by the Iowa legislature and signed by the governor as part of SF 206 last year. The DNR does not have the authority to change this requirement.

Another change that is being considered for both residents and nonresidents would restrict hunters from firing a shotgun shooting slugs or a muzzleloader from the road ditch. This is currently illegal north of Highway 30 and west of Highway 63. The change would make it illegal statewide.

One change that I recommended is not in the proposed rule. I had recommended that the nonresident license quotas be set on a county by county basis rather than the 10 large zones we have now. I believe this change would do a better job of distributing nonresident deer hunters across the state. I did an analysis and found that in 2004 some counties (Allamakee, Van Buren, Appanoose, Taylor, ...) had concentrations of nonresident hunters while adjacent counties ( Wapello, Winneshiek, Clarke, ... ) had very few nonresident hunters. I also looked back over the last 10 year and found that as the percentage of nonresidents in a county increased the percentage of resident hunters decreased.

My conclusion was that the 10 zones worked fine when the nonresident quota was only 1200 or 2500 but now that it has been increased to 6000 the zones need to be made smaller if we hope to distribute hunting pressure evenly. My proposal was to distribute the tags among the counties based upon the amount of high quality deer habitat in the county. Those counties with more habitat (and more deer) would get more licenses and those with less habitat would get fewer tags.


(I will email the complete analysis to those who would like to see it. email:[email protected] )

Any interested person may make written suggestions or comments on the proposed amendments on or before January 4, 2006. Such written materials should be directed to the Wildlife Bureau Chief, Department of Natural Resources, Wallace State Office Building, Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0034; fax (515)281-6794. Persons who wish to convey their views orally should contact the Bureau at (515)281-6156 or at the Bureau offices on the fourth floor of the Wallace State Office Building.

There will be a public hearing on January 4, 2006, at 10:30 a.m. in the Fourth Floor East Conference Room of the Wallace State Office Building, at which time persons may present their views either orally or in writing. At the hearing, persons will be asked to give their names and addresses for the record and to confine their remarks to the subject of the notice.

*****

IMHO, raising the cost of a NR license and then including an antlerless deer tag is one thing, but making the purchase of one MANDATORY instead, and at a cost of $100.00 is wrong. Especially when the residents can get their "doe" tags for free or practically nothing, IF they even choose to purchase them.

If you have any concerns about this, or any of the other points mentioned above, please write them down and send them to the address above to be recognized. We have no representation otherwise.

Thanks.
 
G

·
Mandatory a hunter to buy a doe tag for $100, I would buy one but for $100 I wouldn't, I would if it was a either sex tag
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top