What's your thoughts? Non-hunters purchasing a hunting liscense?

[MeatBuck]

They don’t spend their own money and they don’t fade away. Well funded and organized. Not sure if it has an impact, but I highly doubt it will go away. It will increase if they feel they are making an impact.

Who are "they"?

 

[ODB]

Who are "they"?

They = meddling anti-hunters who use legal but assholian methods to exert their will on those who otherwise mind their business and are productive members of society.

 

[jspradley]

My fear would be them just checking in fictitious kills, because how many western states require kills to be checked in person? If the kill data stays the same it would likely be a lot harder and take a lot longer to allocate more tags to offset the problem.

You could put some law in place saying tag holders have to attempt to hunt, but this would really only keep them from publicizing their true intentions. There are similar laws for waterfowl blinds in my home state, where a riparian land owner can keep others from hunting public water near his land so long as he builds a blind and "hunts" it at least once a year. This now amounts to a $20 donation to the state agency a year for the annual blind tag, but one blind effectively cuts off half mile of public water. Certain large areas of public water are now are completely unhuntable because of it.

That's certainly possible but I guarantee if harvest statistics went from 10% to 99% the state would figure out some way to verify if the kills were legitimate or not.

 

[ODB]

That's certainly possible but I guarantee if harvest statistics went from 10% to 99% the state would figure out some way to verify if the kills were legitimate or not.

Maybe they should get ahead of the game and make it a crime punishable by license suspension for falsely “checking” game.

 

[MeatBuck]

The last time I heard something like this it was a social media hoax. All the b tags were bought by anti hunters they said... No the Hmongs bought em all.
Is there some hard evidence of this that I'm missing?

 

[jspradley]

Maybe they should get ahead of the game and make it a crime punishable by license suspension for falsely “checking” game.

I would be surprised if it isn't already illegal. It is falsifying an official document after all.

Can anyone confirm?

 

[mproberts]

I would be surprised if it isn't already illegal. It is falsifying an official document after all.

Can anyone confirm?

Each state is obviously different, but in my home state it was only proposed to be illegal a couple months ago. I can't understand why it wasn't already illegal? Maybe a specific law just make it easier for them to enforce instead of general forgery/falsification/utterance laws. It became a big problem because lots of deer hunters would check fake does so they could kill more bucks.

 

[ODB]

Each state is obviously different, but in my home state it was only proposed to be illegal a couple months ago. I can't understand why it wasn't already illegal? Maybe a specific law just make it easier for them to enforce instead of general forgery/falsification/utterance laws. It became a big problem because lots of deer hunters would check fake does so they could kill more bucks.

The fecundity of the criminal mind is amazing. Normal folks just wouldn’t think of doing a thing the criminal mind can’t imagine not doing.

 

[Ucsdryder]

^^^^ You dont need Hunter Safety to apply do you?

Yes, you can’t get a point without one in Colorado.

 

[Sooner]

Pretty sure I have to put my number in when oredering a NR Colorado license. Actually dont remember a state where I didnt need it as a NR. May have been one or two but I dont recall it.

Yup. We definitely need it as NR Colorado hunters. Unless you're born before 1960 or something like that.

 

[Billy Goat]

Just found it in the Colorado regs. I didn't think I needed it when I was first applying. But it states if you aren't verified you need to have the number from your certificate to put in for the draws in April. Might have changed in the past dozen years, and I was verified the first year I went out there so it hasn't been a concern.

I know Nevada you need to send them a copy of your certificate before you can apply. Can't remember what Wyoming does.

 

[SerottaCSI]

It’s easy enough to fabricate a hunter safety number. These numbers weren’t tracked or in a database in the 80’s when I got mine. Never had to show it in Colorado when I moved here. Non hunters buying tags is short term effort by the Left to disrupt hunters. The more problematic effort currently underway is the reintroduction of wolves in Colorado. It’s a political move to disrupt hunting and wildlife conservation in general. Instead of relying on the experts (CO parks & wildlife) , they are introducing it as a ballot measure in 2020, which is certain to pass. Once this happens, undulate populations will devistated, which will hurt hunting, and will eventually lead to fewer hunters coming here to hunt, and therefore fewer dollars going toward conservation. On balance, I’d much rather see the Left donate to conservation.

 

[Rich M]

They = meddling anti-hunters who use legal but assholian methods to exert their will on those who otherwise mind their business and are productive members of society.

LOL!

There is no law against buying a hunting license and not going. They aren't doing anything wrong if they don't submit false harvest data.

We've got em down here buying duck permits for a wildlife refuge. Hunters are going bonkers - only about 30-50% of the hunters show up for a given hunt.

I could see less hunters being a good thing for the trophy big-game guys, the duck hunters need folks to keep the birds moving.

 

[ODB]

LOL!

There is no law against buying a hunting license and not going. They aren't doing anything wrong if they don't submit false harvest data.

We've got em down here buying duck permits for a wildlife refuge. Hunters are going bonkers - only about 30-50% of the hunters show up for a given hunt.

I could see less hunters being a good thing for the trophy big-game guys, the duck hunters need folks to keep the birds moving.

You don’t turn a cruise ship on a dime...but you turn it 1 degree and have some patience and eventually you’ll get to the same place.

 

[Rich M]

As long as you are DOING something. Most guys piss & moan and call that doing something.

I found a cause back around 1999 and invested over 700 hours plus travel, weekends, phone bills, etc, into getting it started that year. Had 6 guys helping. A state-wide pro-hunting organization - it is going on 18-19 years old - has established relationships with the people who make the decisions. Anyway I'm the liaison at that wildlife refuge and deal with crap from both sides. Other than that, I'm not much involved anymore. I've given my years to the hunting heritage, time for the younger more enthusiastic folks to carry the torch.

That's the angle I look at all these things, where folks say other should do something. Until they get off their duffs and put some of their own blood in the game, they are just flapping gums.

If you are gathering folks with a common agenda together and approaching the powers that be with creative solutions and working towards the common good. Great - I commend you.

If you aren't - what's holding you back?

 

[Felix40]

Maybe they should get ahead of the game and make it a crime punishable by license suspension for falsely “checking” game.

We did that in NM. I dont know why other states cant get on board with universal reporting. It makes for better data and helps catch people who break the rules.

 

[Desk Jockey]

Hmmmm. This one concerns me. It shows the anti hunting crowd is (1) willingness to spend $$$ to usurp hunting license allocation and administration, (2) it demonstrates a knowledge of the hunting license process and it is a pretty clever way to attack it and (3) it seems like it would be hard to detect and prosecute.

 

[BuzzH]

Doesn't bother me in the slightest. Wildlife isn't owned by just hunters, but rather all citizens of the State it resides in. If a non-hunter or anti-hunter wants to apply for tags, fine with me. They have every right to apply like anyone else.

How is that different than a hunter applying for a tag, hunting one day, and going home? I've seen people on all of my rifle bull tags in Arizona, hunt maybe 2 days of the season and pack it in and head home.

I've drawn quite a few tags myself that I've never even hunted, or maybe hunted one or two days.

Way bigger things to worry about, IMO.

 

[Desk Jockey]

How is that different than a hunter applying for a tag, hunting one day, and going home?

While I tend to agree, this is a bit more subversive than that. It is an attempt to deny opportunity and access based on a deliberate intent. It would be tantamount to applying for and securing a bunch of backcountry permits in Yellowstone with no intention of ever hiking. Or taking up all the parking spots at a birdwatching trailhead by parking random cars there from sunup to sundown everyday so no one could access the spot to watch birds.

It is a sneaky way to undermine the activity of hunting and a hard one to defend against.

 

[BuzzH]

While I tend to agree, this is a bit more subversive than that. It is an attempt to deny opportunity and access based on a deliberate intent. It would be tantamount to applying for and securing a bunch of backcountry permits in Yellowstone with no intention of ever hiking. Or taking up all the parking spots at a birdwatching trailhead by parking random cars there from sunup to sundown everyday so no one could access the spot to watch birds.

It is a sneaky way to undermine the activity of hunting and a hard one to defend against.

How do you prevent a citizen from applying for a tag and choosing not to hunt that tag if they draw?

You can’t... none of your business if I want to hunt a tag every day of the season, one week, one hour, one minute or use my tag to light a Cuban cigar.