fishorhunt
New Member
Sorry for the lengthy post. Just rec'd this from my PF Regional Biologist and knew you'd all like to provide comments. Here you go....
I wanted to make you all aware of a public comment page within the DNR
Website. Please go look as there are some DNR rule and legislative
initiatives that require your comment PLEASE TAKE TIME TO MAKE SOME
BRIEF COMMENTS
1. The principal legislative issue is the DNR's push to increase
nonresident deer permits by an additional 6000 (to a total of 12,000) and turkey hunters by an additional 1100. There are better ways to get
the funding needed.
* The supporters of additional permits will be flooding this site with
commentary in favor of more. You need to speak up against it if that
is your position. You also need to have good reasons for your position
(there are some talking points below that you may adapt if you wish in
crafting your own statement). You may only provide 250 words of commentary.
2. Legislation regarding Trapping -limited Otter trapping, Bobcat
trapping--We need to get behind these trapping issues and support the
DNR's limited trapping seasons
http://www.iowadnr.com/wildlife/db/feedback.html
Pheasants Forever chapters and many of our more than 20,000 Iowa
members oppose the proposed DNR legislation doubling any sex non-resident
deer permits, and increaseing non-resident turkey permits by nearly 50%.
PF agrees with the Iowa Conservation Alliance (a group comprising
nearly all of Iowa's major conservation organizations) which also voted in
January to oppose this legislation. Here is why:
Additional non-residents will aggravate hunting access problems for
Iowans:
* Expanding non-resident any-sex deer & turkey permits will increase
recreational access problems, and complicate deer management and herd
reduction. Recent surveys of PF leaders and members found the average
respondent had lost access on over 5 farms totaling 1274 acres in the past
several years. The survey found 70% of respondents favor no basic
increase in non-resident permits. Among the causes of loss--32% were to
non-resident recreational land purchase, and 39% to hunting leases that catered mostly to nonresidents.
Iowa residents balance Iowa's deer population:
* Residents are important. Iowa deer harvest depends on residents
finding access to control our expanding deer population. Non-resident
purchase and leasing restrict resident access/recreation while compounding
herd control problems. Hunter numbers are already declining. If Iowans
cannot find hunting access, more will leave the sport. Iowans harvest,
by far, the greatest majority of doe deer.
* Iowans should be our first consideration. Only 14% Iowans hunt in
other states. The rest choose to, or have no choice except to hunt within
our own borders they need access HERE. Fully 93% of the total of all
hunting days taken by Iowans anywhere, occur within our borders.
There are better funding alternatives that do not impact Iowans
hunting access:
* The DNR says it needs nonresident permit funding to create an access and land acquisition program.
* PF supports expanded funding, but there are better methods to create
it. Increasing the Habitat Stamp fee by $10, or creating a $10 Access
Fee for all hunters creates more funding than the proposed increase in
nonresident permits, without increasing access pressures.
* Increasing general license fees for all nonresidents and increasing
the cost of current nonresident deer and turkey permits could add an
additional $1.5 million annually to the DNRs programs.
* Legislators should give this serious consideration to the permanent,
dedicated, Missouri-style, public funding initiative for Natural
Resources (an earmarked % of a sales tax increase, or similar vehicle)
supported by our PF chapter leaders and members.
I wanted to make you all aware of a public comment page within the DNR
Website. Please go look as there are some DNR rule and legislative
initiatives that require your comment PLEASE TAKE TIME TO MAKE SOME
BRIEF COMMENTS
1. The principal legislative issue is the DNR's push to increase
nonresident deer permits by an additional 6000 (to a total of 12,000) and turkey hunters by an additional 1100. There are better ways to get
the funding needed.
* The supporters of additional permits will be flooding this site with
commentary in favor of more. You need to speak up against it if that
is your position. You also need to have good reasons for your position
(there are some talking points below that you may adapt if you wish in
crafting your own statement). You may only provide 250 words of commentary.
2. Legislation regarding Trapping -limited Otter trapping, Bobcat
trapping--We need to get behind these trapping issues and support the
DNR's limited trapping seasons
http://www.iowadnr.com/wildlife/db/feedback.html
Pheasants Forever chapters and many of our more than 20,000 Iowa
members oppose the proposed DNR legislation doubling any sex non-resident
deer permits, and increaseing non-resident turkey permits by nearly 50%.
PF agrees with the Iowa Conservation Alliance (a group comprising
nearly all of Iowa's major conservation organizations) which also voted in
January to oppose this legislation. Here is why:
Additional non-residents will aggravate hunting access problems for
Iowans:
* Expanding non-resident any-sex deer & turkey permits will increase
recreational access problems, and complicate deer management and herd
reduction. Recent surveys of PF leaders and members found the average
respondent had lost access on over 5 farms totaling 1274 acres in the past
several years. The survey found 70% of respondents favor no basic
increase in non-resident permits. Among the causes of loss--32% were to
non-resident recreational land purchase, and 39% to hunting leases that catered mostly to nonresidents.
Iowa residents balance Iowa's deer population:
* Residents are important. Iowa deer harvest depends on residents
finding access to control our expanding deer population. Non-resident
purchase and leasing restrict resident access/recreation while compounding
herd control problems. Hunter numbers are already declining. If Iowans
cannot find hunting access, more will leave the sport. Iowans harvest,
by far, the greatest majority of doe deer.
* Iowans should be our first consideration. Only 14% Iowans hunt in
other states. The rest choose to, or have no choice except to hunt within
our own borders they need access HERE. Fully 93% of the total of all
hunting days taken by Iowans anywhere, occur within our borders.
There are better funding alternatives that do not impact Iowans
hunting access:
* The DNR says it needs nonresident permit funding to create an access and land acquisition program.
* PF supports expanded funding, but there are better methods to create
it. Increasing the Habitat Stamp fee by $10, or creating a $10 Access
Fee for all hunters creates more funding than the proposed increase in
nonresident permits, without increasing access pressures.
* Increasing general license fees for all nonresidents and increasing
the cost of current nonresident deer and turkey permits could add an
additional $1.5 million annually to the DNRs programs.
* Legislators should give this serious consideration to the permanent,
dedicated, Missouri-style, public funding initiative for Natural
Resources (an earmarked % of a sales tax increase, or similar vehicle)
supported by our PF chapter leaders and members.
