Alright I have read every post and surprisingly enough do have some opinions. I do not think that all or even most NR hunters are evil or NR land owners. I have hunted elk in New Mexico and black bears in Minnesota as well as fished in several different states so the road goes both ways.
I don't really agree with the reciprocity thing either, but I can understand where many are basing their feelings there. I don't believe that NR land owners should get special treatment on this issue. When they purchased their land the regulations were public knowledge and the buying decision was made based on what the buyer felt was a workable situation for them and agreed to the restrictions because it was worth it to them at the time. I don't believe in buying a ticket to the movie and then once I am seated asking or demanding that they show a different film!
If I were to propose any changes it might be some thing like this. Current NR licenses are to high for the average class hunters. The results are that Many NR hunters have excess disposable income and so make a decision that because they have finds available why not just buy some ground even if they can only get a any-sex tag once in about 3 years. Then with their cash or influence perhaps they can sway the law makers into giving them extra privileges. What do they have to loose any way, because they are really already satisfied with the status quo, and just maybe they can get it better? Now if we lowered the price where the more average hunter felt that he could afford to hunt here, he might not propose a lease to the land owner or call a real estate agent from his tree stand to put in a purchase offer. Drop the price to maybe $300 or $350 and then up the quota slightly to say 10,000 NR tags. That would give the DNR about the revenue stream or perhaps a little more with the purchase of preference points by the extra applicants. Along with this we should either do away with our so-called outfitters or make them become licensed as such and be bonded and restrict them on numbers of hunters or acres leased.
Next how would you NR landowners receive something like this. If you enrolled your land, all of it not just a not very productive section, in something like the Walk In Program, for every year it is enrolled you could get an any-sex tag for that same land. Land must be consecutively enrolled and not in one year and out the next, maybe some thing like a 5 year program. That would be a win win situation because it would give you that coveted BUCK tag and allow resident hunters access to land and allow them to help "manage" the land. Instead of the cash payment for the enrollment you could get the tag at normal or reduced cost. This would add access acres and not deplete DNR funds as the current program does.
Along with the slight increase in NR licenses I would enact and enforce a non-party hunt regulation for any NR hunters, but would leave the party hunting in place for residents if they choose to hunt that way. There are many NR hunters who just want to come here to hunt with family or friends and if they just wanted to do that they could get an antlerless tag but could not use Uncle Henry's land owner tag to kill a buck and haul it home. I am honestly not sure how to enforce this except that maybe require NR hunters to check their deer some where and when they check a deer they are done hunting. I don't really like the idea of check stations all over but if only a few thousand NR were required to use them there wouldn't be the need for lots of them or lots of extra man power to man them, or maybe let COs in the field also check them for NRs.
One thing I will say is that I do believe with the current deer herd decline that it might be more beneficial to the RESOURSE to have hunters harvest more bucks even if they are small. Controversial I know but, a small buck might grow to a trophy in a couple of years but he isn't going to drop 4 or 5 fawns who might grow even bigger like that mature doe that is killed in that miss understood management plan. The resource is not just 150 inch bucks, it is also those that raise those bucks and the more of those does we kill then sooner or later those bucks won't exist either.:way:
