Howler

Well, I did it, I went back and read that post from last year, well most of it anyways, in the deer hunting forum. Didn't remember it being that long!
For the most part Mark, I argued with you this time, because I like to argue, my wife says! And I don't disagree that rifle hunters could/should be given a few more days. I don't beleive that it will help manage the herd though, I beleive it will only make rifle hunters be more selective in the size of antlers they hunt for. I don't think a longer rifle season will lower the deer herd numbers much, as I don't think rifle hunters that have a buck tag are going to shoot a doe until the buck tag is filled. SO, that is where the late doe season come into play. If a guy knows he can hunt for 10 or 12 days for a buck and he knows that he will have another opp. to fill his tag with a doe in the late season, he will hold off and not shoot a doe, until the late season. And especially the non-resident hunters that come in and pay $1500-$3000 to an out-fitter, heck they may go home empty handed and not even come back to fill the tag with a doe at all.
And the land availability issue is only going to get worse. Cities continue to grow, and now the T-tags are driving the out-fitters to lease more land, and leased land in general is becoming the norm., due to land-owners realizing that there is a new source of income, people will pay to hunt turkeys, deer, upland birds, etc. Heck, even the price of land, to buy, is being driven up. You can bet that farmers aren't paying $700+/acre, because they know that they can't farm the land and make a profit.
So, what to do! A longer rifle season may help spread the "rifle hunting pressure" some, and it may up the "buck" kill ratio some, but will it help the herd as a whole?
Why is it that you don't like the game tags and the late doe season? Seems to me that by offering game tags for $11 to everyone is a strong management tool. And I do agree that the Dept. of Wildlife needs a better way of knowing herd rates/kill rates etc., but I'm not real sure how they need to go about achieving them.
I'm not convinced that you're not anti-bowhunting, but I do see and agree with some of your points. I know I don't always listen to what is being said sometimes too, my wife tells me that often

MarkIIVT

Well...Deer hunting issues make for passionate discourse.

The last post you have, I respect in it's entirety, and I can accept it as it is. Takes some yelling , then when it dies down, we can talk. First we got to get all the stuff out of the way I guess.

I re-read it too. Lots of good arguments, and passionate non-yeilding belief.

That is why I was wanting 4 years ago to have a tag for rifle to have a Doe/buck bonus. Have to take a doe, to get the buck tag.

Maybe that's my problem, I don't have a wife. LOL

I realize I sometimes go over the top a little, and that is why I run to get facts. It is my own internal check, that actually tones down my responses. Yeah, the above was toned down, as you can see from that post a year ago. I was having a hard time last year, very bad year. Very very bad and difficult year.

kshunter

Who in the world could speak for every 1000,000 firearm hunters and all the hunters in Kansas. On average I talk to maybe 1-2K different hunters per month and get on this subject with maybe half of them. And yes a very very high majority are firearms hunters are just like me on the unitization of bow permits(and i'm talking a 95%-5% ratio). Maybe I only get to talk to just a small of the whole population, but it gives the "common sense" knowledge with real hunters. The same knowledge that won't be picked up from going to school, or surfing the internet gathering hypothetical information.

And like I said before:

It's so obvious your experience with the public is very, very limited. Does that make you a bad hunter... no. Getting to know the public is not done by sitting behind the computer, dweling on something as hypothetically could happen, according to data. I've hunted all over Kansas, know a lot about the culture in different areas, the population, and the attitudes. This is what getting out of the shell and away from your house teaches you. It's getting out there and understanding what people think and believe, about the greatest sport of all... Hunting.

It's not whether you are a bad or a good hunter, it's the ethical logic that makes me question you on the type of hunter you are. I am so against hunters bickering among themselves the rifle vs. bowhunters. It's so stupid because hunters need to unit as a whole, if an anti-hunter read this forum, they'd give you a pat on the back. Just read the first couple of posts before I even came into the discussion because I felt bad for a good guy like Howler getting ripped for the wrong reasons, and the wrong information being sent to the lurkers out there.

Give me one good reason why you think SBC 363 happened because the riflehunters were fed up with the bowhunters? Plain and simple, you have given me no reason other than you obviously being jealous of the bowseason, and yes you are the minority. Sorry but that is pathetic. It's so out there that I can't beleive I am even debating with someone on this issue.


I guess that is a "whoops", no coment on that post from Mark. [&:]


Visit my website, that'll explain enough about my love for Kansas hunting as a whole, rifle or bow. I taken around 50% oof my kills with a bow and about 50% with a rifle. No bias opinion, and no bull####.

Mark you have came up with some good points, the first one that pops in to mind is take a doe before a buck(according to the county only), sounds like a great idea. Especially for counties that are close to the major cities.

Here is something I need to say before I go further. The area around Johnson County(Olathe/Kansas City area) opened their rifle season early this past year to lower the deer herd. This decision was highly pressured by the insurance agencies, and was accepted. During this time period, I talked to so many people so excited since they were able to watch a big buck across the side of a 2-3 hundred yards across the field and nail him, since he was stupid and running after the does. Did this season help the management? Very minimal, it helped take a lot of nice bucks out, and lower the quality deer management goal. This truley made me sick to the stomach, because I heard about this senario so much. Just another mistake made by the KDWP, not because of the riflehunters were being fed up, but because of the money driven lobbyists.

Here's what I truley believe. Mark you are a hunter that doesn't hear much form the real hunting public, but you do care about what Kansas hunting is and hope the best for it. That we can both agree on. You are fairly biased against bowhunters. Why not join as hunters and make a resolution. You obviously know the political and lawful issues more than 99% of the hunters out there. We agree there is a problem and that you think the culprit of the problem is the bowhunters and I think it is because of the majority infuence of the outfitters, lobbyists, commercialists, etc,. How about we put our brains together and achieve something great, like what is BEST FOR THE HUNTING IN KANSAS. Isn't that our whole goal? Please, join us hunters as a whole and we can acheive much more. But first the understanding of the problem is your first real problem in helping of the situation.

SAPPER1

I didn't mean to hit a sore spot but I really do appreciate ALL of the info.

On a lighter note. I got the job and I hope to be a resident fo KS by the end of July.

kshunter

Congrats on the job Sapper!

Howler

Congrats on the job Sapper, and good luck in finding a honey hole to call your own to hunt on.

MarkIIVT

I am going to respond, I had to cool off a little before I said something I really didn't mean. I M not going to let lies, misinformation, and ignorance stand, it will be responded too.

kshunter

To make a long story short, I agree a lot with your stance as far as the political side of some problems with SB 363 and why it happened. Main thing I don't agree with and never would agree with, is the bashlash that you claimed happened because rifle hunters were fed up with the long bowhunting seasons, short rifle seasons, etc. And yes this is something that cannot be proven as fact either way. Just have to get to talk to real hunters to know, and a lot of them at that.

MarkIIVT

OK, here goes.

About your opinion with my experience with the public being very very limited.

I spend 90% of my time in front of the public dealing with issues such as HAZMAT, WMD, and Occupational illness,disease, and deaths, with consultation, seminars, and training. Issues highly charged, contentious, and having greater consequence than hunting issues. I have traveled the world, filled in 2 passports with visas and entry stamps, and numerous states. I racked up 30,000+ frequent flyer miles in less tnat 2.5 months. Currently I am in Dallas temporarily in front of the public doing the same. Again, Read the thread "Kansas Hunters Getting Screwed". All this has been stated before and you are rehashing the same old tired issues, and p-poor opinions. There are a lot of people that agree with my arguments and deductions.

So you got that one wrong.

So you see I do get "out of the house", and I do talk to other hunters and firearms enthusiaists. As for your talking with "real hunters". I checked out the websites you frequent. 90% of the respondants are bowhunters, so you see your basis is biased. I did not include heresay in my statements such as you did. But I will do so now. At the highpower lines of the gun ranges I visit and frequent the hunters I talked with (I guess they are not REAL hunters since they use firearms in your opinion) support the unitizing 100%, as well as expanded season and land accessibility with increased population trends, which we have in the state. Big Suprise huh?

Just because someone picks up a bow does not automatically make them:
a) Ehtical
b) Keeper of the moral high ground
c) Super hunter
d) More concerned with conservation and deer herd
And just because someone picks up a rifle does not make them devoid of those qualities. According to your posts and others, and your opinionated reasoning, that is in fact what you are stating. That firearms hunters are a bane to hunting in Kansas. Read your posts, read others posts. That is why I M responding.

As for your dressing me down about anti-hunting groups and "giving them ammunition". What the hell do you think you have done? There is a much larger group out there and they are Anit-gunners, and there is a lot more of them than ARs. You (and others like you) paint with a broad brush firearms hunters as taking long shots (200-300 yds you said), that they are unsafe, and that firearms are irresponsible, and a negative impact on the resource. That the character of a firearms hunter is to shoot at anything. Look at all the anti-gun crap that has been said by BOWHUNTERs in the State of Kansas in order to justify their position and keep an exclusive season. This excuse of "I gun hunt too" by you is thin. Here is some news for you, Firearms hunters do not aspire to become bowhunters. Mainly because shooting a gun is FUN. Archery is NOT the epitome of hunting. If you firearm hunt successfully, you have to allow deer to get just as close in order to selectively hunt. Close deer bring in the far deer, very simple, and it is such great fun and a GREAT RUSH. Our national spirit for life, hunting, and liberty is inextricably linked to firearms, not bows and arrows. I suggest you check at some of the things you and others have stated (IN THE STATE OF KANSAS), and see how similar it is to the language of the anti-gunners. It is worse at times than some anti-gun groups. I would stongly suggest you can the malarky on that.

The truth is much different. National surveys show that the majority of shots from hunters on deer is in the 75-150 yd range. There are just too many varibles for a 200-300 yd shot, and it gets lower percentage return. Again, if you were a firearm enthusiastist, you would know that 75-150 is optimum for bullet performance, velocity, wind deflection, shot, placement, and is a whole lot more fun letting them get close, than the reach out an touch something shooting. In Unit 19 where you stated this, the majority of the land is not suitable for such shots WHERE THE DEER ARE. There is timber, obstructions, etc. Many places a 200-300 yd shot is physically infeasible in that area where there would be deer. I know, I lived in the Lawrence-Topeka area for 12 years. Agian, your opinion, does not fit the facts, nor the real life conditions. It is just something you believe after "talking with someone".

Additionally my informant in KDWP (and a bowhunter) tells me that you are wrong about Unit 19 being bad for management. It seems KDWP is about to make a statement about what a success it was in terms of more hunter access, recuction of the doe population without undue stress on the herd in terms of quality. Seems the Buck/doe ratio for firearms was around the 50/50 split again. So you are wrong on that as well. Again, you did not check facts, but stated an unsubstanciated opinion.

BTW, I am not "jealous" of "your season". Because, it is not "your season". These things are not nor should be carved in stone. If management is to manage, then the flexibility in season length and placement is a must. The seasons whatever they are belong to the PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. Not bowhunters, not firearms hunters, not outfitters, not AR or anti-gunners, but to all, and is stipulated and directed by the majority, not just one group. It is based on management goals and data illustrating the conditions present. And rights and laws are to be EQUALLY APPLIED by US Constitution, and not for some inane reason. And the logic that bowhunting in Kansas needs to have a 2.5 month season and the rut because the of "challange of the sport because of success rate", is under serious trouble. Since firearm success rate is below archery in the state, does that me firearm hunters should get 2.5 months and the rut now???? HMMMMMM????

As for "political blowback'. Check the bowsite threads. The KBAers are not happy with the effect of what their efforts provided. Even they are saying "KBA's reputation in the legislature is mud because of the actions and statement of members interacting with members of the legislature". Did you know in the last legislative session that KDWP was barred from many Rep and Sen. offices. That they lite into a lot of Senators and Representatives. Did you know the amandment that preceded SB 363 was a proposal to smoke out the bowhunters in the KDWP employ, a political fishing trip??? Very good authority I have this on, whether you believe it or not.

SO, do not profess to me you have the moral, factual, or cultural high ground on this issue. You do not. And I do represent a majority, not you and your little group *****ing about doing what every hunter in the state has to do. So suck it up!

And this is a gun rights issue. I want more new hunters. Most new hunters are firearms hunters. The NRA president Dean Keane stated the need to expand opportunity and the need to protect the weekend firearms hunter as a policy for the NRA. This group is the largest in NRA and the nation, and is the biggest supporter of 2nd amdn. rights issues. If you look where CCL do not pass, there is a strong archery provision in those states. Coincidence, I think not. You see by denegrating the firearms hunter in order to save your exclusive hunting privlige, your group undermines 2nd amend issues.

MarkIIVT

MULE DEER

KS HUNTER

Saw on your your NAWF site the thread about the Mule Deer. That is whyunitizing tags has got you so upset. It is not about hunting in an adjacent unit, with 9 units you will be able to do the equilivant of that combared to firearm hunters. It will limit your free run of the state and taking anydeer you see, anywhere. That's why you are going to Oakley, isn't it? Will be the last year you may be able to do it. BTW, I grew up there and go back often, south of Oakley momument rocks area if you can find access, good luck on getting access. Most are the t-tag people and are not happy with bowhunters and their legislative shenanagans.

It is about you hunting in Clay County for a portion of your hunt and then trapesing out to Oakley some 300 some miles away from that Clay County Unit, so you can Hunt Mule Deer. DUDE! No hunter can do that, except the State wide anydeer OTC, archery resident. The poor ML even have to draw. BTW, mulies are not going to be that easy in spot and stalk hunt, there is little cover and they see a long way. Yeah they do act different than whitetail, but they are not "easy". They are durable and hard to kill. That is another myth that KDWP has perpetuated without any supporting data, as my and your observation show different.

Next year the "any deer" will also be stripped off the resident archery permit as well. WHY?

Because all resident archery are "anydeer", and non-res archery are "whitetail only". Same issue as the bowhunters were raising heck about, non-resident archery being statewide, so what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and constitutionally protected. So the "species" tag will come.

Look at it in another way 40,000+ Firearms hunters have to "draw" for an available 3700 tags. All archery tags are mule deer included. So 100% for archery (and you can go anywhere for the next year which explains your trip to Oakley) and <1% for firearms.

AND, you and your buddy saw the same thing as my hunting crew saw LOTS of Mule deer, you and he stated that very clearly. So why is KDWP cutting firearms tags for mule deer????? They say there is a population decrease, however my hunting crew, you and your buddy on NAWF agree there are "LOTS".

See the problem yet, or do I have to get out the crayons and coloring books for you as well as "population indicators 101".