Onecam, Love your idea about the doe tag with the anysex tag. I think it's long overdue. I'm not willing to resign myself to an increase in the number of tags though. I think the resident hunter can and needs to step up to the plate & tell your legislators that we will pay more for our tags to avoid this. If they look at how we responded to the $26 doe tags to help manage the herd they have to give us a chance. The DNR will be on our side if we speak to our willingness to support them financially. In the end it's all about the ca$h. When you have a DNR employee advocating more tags to remove temptation from poaching (that's how it was presented in the article)times must be pretty tough. We as a State are long overdue to provide the DNR with a guaranteed stream of revenue (Say 1/2 % on the sales tax) and we could avoid all this discussion. Why have to tinker with something that we've obviously been doing right for so long when it's only about the $. How many peiople realize that all the cash from the extra doe tags went to support the fisheries side of the budget due to plummeting fishing license sales? Think about the public ground that could be bought with 1/2% on the sales tax!!! Then we could more easily increase the NR tags totals.
Also, Onecam, if you advocate the removal of the 35% cap would you proportion the tags out per county to avoid the inevitable hotspots? This may seem like a non issue to all of us until you are the one who loses their honeyhole to a new NR bow hunter. Remember, they tend to lease for the entire season! Maggs
