blake
Life Member
NEWS!
Scott Lautenbaugh: Amended deer-hunting bill proposes sensible solutions
By Scott Lautenbaugh
The writer, of Omaha, is a Nebraska state senator representing District 18.
I’m writing to clear up several misconceptions surrounding my bill — Legislative Bill 836. In a recent essay (Feb. 22 Midlands Voices), a gentleman from Fremont, Neb., made several inaccurate statements regarding the bill as it now stands.
LB 836, as originally introduced, was an admittedly extreme measure designed to address the overpopulation of deer in various places throughout the state. It provided landowners with the ability to eliminate deer on their property and offered tax credits for those who allow deer to be hunted on their land.
As I indicated at the initial public hearing on the bill, changes would have to be made, and I was willing to work with all parties involved. I knew that allowing landowners to simply kill all the deer they wanted went too far. Also, as we’re looking at having to cut the budget further either this year or next to stay in balance, we can’t afford deer tax credits now.
However, it is apparent that something must be done. I introduced a bill a few years back to compensate farmers for their losses due to deer crop damage. The bill went nowhere, as the estimated cost was in the millions of dollars. However, that simply underlines how much our farmers are losing to the deer. And that doesn’t even include the damage that deer cause on our roads and the injuries they cause.
No one disputes that there are too many deer in the eastern part of the state, and I believe the time to act is now. It appears the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission agrees, as its members were working on several measures to decrease the deer herd.
I have been working with Game and Parks and the Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee, and we have amended the bill to provide additional tools to thin the deer herd. It provides flexibility regarding certain permits and seasons.
Game and Parks representatives have explained to me that their goal is a 25 percent reduction in the deer herd generally along the Missouri River over the next three years. They’ve agreed to accomplish that reduction even sooner in Douglas and Washington Counties, where the problem is worse. My bill, as amended, gives them the tools they say they need to accomplish that.
From the outset, some have said that this represents the Legislature intruding upon the province of Game and Parks. I do not understand this argument. The Legislature gives Game and Parks the authority to do what it does and the tools to do it.
For the same reason, I have not been blaming Game and Parks for the current deer problem. If Game and Parks needs additional tools to reduce the herd, then it’s the Legislature that must act.
Some in the hunting community have been alarmed by this bill. They fear that it will somehow alter hunting. I see some benefits for hunters in this bill as amended, and I think the fears are unfounded.
Game and Parks will be using the tools in this bill at its discretion to reduce the herd only in the areas it sees fit, as indicated above. I do not think Game and Parks can be said to be hostile to hunting, and I trust it to get the job done.
Rather than taking wildlife management out of the hands of Game and Parks, as alleged by some, the bill gives the ability to Game and Parks to meet its stated goal.
One thing we all can agree upon is that the best way to reduce the size of the deer herd is through hunting. For this to work, hunters need access to land upon which to hunt.
So far, LB 836 has caused a tremendous amount of focus on the problem. Representatives of the Farm Bureau and the Nebraska Cattlemen have been supportive and offered to help with the problem. My request to them was to get the word out to their members — if you can allow hunting on your land, please do. We all benefit from that.
Finally, I believe we are at long last about to take significant steps to bring the deer herd back under control in the problem areas. The Legislature will cooperate and arm Game and Parks with what it needs. The hunters, as always, will do what they can as well.
It is my hope that the attention this bill has received will help to open additional lands to our hunters, helping to thin the herd further as well. With cooperation, we can solve this problem.
This post is for informational purposes only.
Scott Lautenbaugh: Amended deer-hunting bill proposes sensible solutions
By Scott Lautenbaugh
The writer, of Omaha, is a Nebraska state senator representing District 18.
I’m writing to clear up several misconceptions surrounding my bill — Legislative Bill 836. In a recent essay (Feb. 22 Midlands Voices), a gentleman from Fremont, Neb., made several inaccurate statements regarding the bill as it now stands.
LB 836, as originally introduced, was an admittedly extreme measure designed to address the overpopulation of deer in various places throughout the state. It provided landowners with the ability to eliminate deer on their property and offered tax credits for those who allow deer to be hunted on their land.
As I indicated at the initial public hearing on the bill, changes would have to be made, and I was willing to work with all parties involved. I knew that allowing landowners to simply kill all the deer they wanted went too far. Also, as we’re looking at having to cut the budget further either this year or next to stay in balance, we can’t afford deer tax credits now.
However, it is apparent that something must be done. I introduced a bill a few years back to compensate farmers for their losses due to deer crop damage. The bill went nowhere, as the estimated cost was in the millions of dollars. However, that simply underlines how much our farmers are losing to the deer. And that doesn’t even include the damage that deer cause on our roads and the injuries they cause.
No one disputes that there are too many deer in the eastern part of the state, and I believe the time to act is now. It appears the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission agrees, as its members were working on several measures to decrease the deer herd.
I have been working with Game and Parks and the Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee, and we have amended the bill to provide additional tools to thin the deer herd. It provides flexibility regarding certain permits and seasons.
Game and Parks representatives have explained to me that their goal is a 25 percent reduction in the deer herd generally along the Missouri River over the next three years. They’ve agreed to accomplish that reduction even sooner in Douglas and Washington Counties, where the problem is worse. My bill, as amended, gives them the tools they say they need to accomplish that.
From the outset, some have said that this represents the Legislature intruding upon the province of Game and Parks. I do not understand this argument. The Legislature gives Game and Parks the authority to do what it does and the tools to do it.
For the same reason, I have not been blaming Game and Parks for the current deer problem. If Game and Parks needs additional tools to reduce the herd, then it’s the Legislature that must act.
Some in the hunting community have been alarmed by this bill. They fear that it will somehow alter hunting. I see some benefits for hunters in this bill as amended, and I think the fears are unfounded.
Game and Parks will be using the tools in this bill at its discretion to reduce the herd only in the areas it sees fit, as indicated above. I do not think Game and Parks can be said to be hostile to hunting, and I trust it to get the job done.
Rather than taking wildlife management out of the hands of Game and Parks, as alleged by some, the bill gives the ability to Game and Parks to meet its stated goal.
One thing we all can agree upon is that the best way to reduce the size of the deer herd is through hunting. For this to work, hunters need access to land upon which to hunt.
So far, LB 836 has caused a tremendous amount of focus on the problem. Representatives of the Farm Bureau and the Nebraska Cattlemen have been supportive and offered to help with the problem. My request to them was to get the word out to their members — if you can allow hunting on your land, please do. We all benefit from that.
Finally, I believe we are at long last about to take significant steps to bring the deer herd back under control in the problem areas. The Legislature will cooperate and arm Game and Parks with what it needs. The hunters, as always, will do what they can as well.
It is my hope that the attention this bill has received will help to open additional lands to our hunters, helping to thin the herd further as well. With cooperation, we can solve this problem.
This post is for informational purposes only.