singlecoyote
Proud member of the IBA
Holy crap Bonker! Is it really that big of a deal?
News from the DNR meeting today on allowing tracking dogs.
sureshot
The Hunt Never Ends....
Personally, who cares if Joe Schmoe has a dog and says it can track deer. Maybe it can, maybe it can't. That's the consumer's worry, not mine. If it doesn't work out and his 'service' is not good, then word will travel fast. I don't see the point in making more guidelines to something as simple as having a dog track down a wounded/dead deer. 
Iowabowtech
New Member
Ken,
What is your desire or thoughts on the ability of hunter, tracker and dog to cross a neighbor's fence in pursuit of a wounded deer as it relates to Iowa's current, and rather unique law that allows a hunter to pursue wounded game on another's property without a weapon?
What is your desire or thoughts on the ability of hunter, tracker and dog to cross a neighbor's fence in pursuit of a wounded deer as it relates to Iowa's current, and rather unique law that allows a hunter to pursue wounded game on another's property without a weapon?
nannyslayer
New Member
This new law has inspired me to go out and buy a couple of tracking dogs. I charge by the mile, and its 50 dollar minumum for me to even load the dogs.
Both dogs are guarantee'd.
Both dogs are guarantee'd.
I wish I had that option here. I have been on a lot of tracks that end at the property line because the hunter does not know who the adjoing landowner is or how to get ahold of them. This is one of the biggest topics I push when I am talking to hunters. I allways tell them to do a little work before season, find out who owns the land around them and how to get ahold of them. Just in case you need to go on their property to recover a deer. There is nothing more frustrating than having to stop. One of my busiest years I had 13 tracks that ended at the line, 6 of these I felt were recoverable deer. But the hunter had no clue who the landowner was or how to get ahold of them, so I stoped. Now what the hunter did once I left was on him but I was not going to break our rules no matter how strongly I felt about the track.
I think Iowa's current format would lend it self to allowing a leashed tracking dog to be used in the recovery of an animal. You are talking a hunter or hunter and tracker with a dog on a leash/long line (30'or so b ut not longer than 50') doing what the hunter can do now. I wish I could do that.
Let me ask yall a question. If you are on some else's land tracking a deer and they ask you to leave then are you required to or is the recovery of the animal trump the landowners?
There are a few states that allow for the tracking of game onto someone else's property but if ask to leave you must do so.
I think this is a great improvment for all hunters as tracking dogs are a great resource. No they will not recover every animal, you can not recover what is not dead. They have off days just like us. But when they are working like they should they can make a 4 hr tracking job look like childs play by completing it in an hr or less. This is great when the temps are up and the chance of spoilage is there. Also increases the chance you will get to your animal before the yotes do.
These are just my thoughts and as I said the hunters of Iowa need to work out what is best for them.
Ken
Fishbonker
Life Member
It is that big of deal if you are the first dozen or so people that get screwed before the word of mouth spreads.
Look, I just wanna protect an innocent hunter who may have spent his last couple of dollars buying that used bow and wearing his big brother's hand me down cammo from getting screwed by a guy with a leash, a dog and a flashlight. I'm trying to protect 99% of hobby hunters from paying good money to a snake oil sales man. I will further stipulate that 90% of trackers do a good job with well trained dogs but it is like everything else in life it is the 10% that screw it up for everybody.
Maybe some imagery will help. Take the hunter I alluded to, not a lot of money, just getting started hunting and he shot his first deer. He knows enough that he probably got a liver shot. It is his first deer ever and he wants to find it. He waits an hour or so and tries to track it. His trail peters out in a few yards. He backs out and calls his buddies for advice. His buddies say call old Joe Bob, he'll come over with Mauler his favorite pit bull and they'll find it for you. Joe Bob gets 40 bucks plus mileage just to show up. So now the hunter has to decide between trying to find his deer and taking money away from his family’s everyday needs, oh and there is no way to tell if Joe Bob knows tracking from apple butter. So what does he do?
I'm not putting it out there just to be a contrarian. I'm trying to stop innocent hunters from being taken advantage of. Have you ever said "If I only knew then what I know now?" Sure you have, so isn't it incumbent upon us to try and protect those that don't have a whole lotta "then" behind them and are trying to figure things out "now"?
How many of you have said "I went to the school of hard knocks"? Was it fun? Don't you wanna try to make it better for those who follow us? Why let somebody get "knocked around" if you can stop it? This is our chance to try and ensure a quality product.
And guess what else, we haven't even touched on the tough issues like tracking after dark, dispatching wounded game while tracking, tracking on public ground and what Bowtech alluded to, hunters crossing property lines with a tracking dog pursuing wounded game. If trackers are required to be certified and licensed they must demonstrate knowledge of the laws and ethics of tracking before they can be licensed.
OK, back to the young guy who was tracking his liver shot deer. There are several possible scenarios, 1: He looks up Joe Bob on the DNR website or hand book, sees that Joe Bob and Mauler are certified and licensed, he calls 'em up, they show up, he digs 40 bucks outta his well worn cammo pocket. They go out to his last known blood spot, Joe Bob puts Mauler on the track, 15 minutes later they find the hunters first deer dead in a thicket of multiflora rose so thick that they would never have been able to penetrate with out the help of Mauler. They drag out the deer, it isn't a P&Y buck, but it is his first deer and he couldn't be happier or more proud. Scenario 2: No DNR list, no way to tell other than word of mouth that anybody is worth spending the money on. The hunter calls up Joe Bob like his friend suggested. Joe Bob and Mauler show up, money passes hands, they search for 15 minutes, Joe Bob says "Boy, I think ya got him in the butt, but thanks fur callin me and be sure and tell yur friends 'bout me". The hunter is crest fallen. He thinks "If only there was a list of approved trackers, maybe this would have been different".
If only if only if only……
The ‘Bonker
Look, I just wanna protect an innocent hunter who may have spent his last couple of dollars buying that used bow and wearing his big brother's hand me down cammo from getting screwed by a guy with a leash, a dog and a flashlight. I'm trying to protect 99% of hobby hunters from paying good money to a snake oil sales man. I will further stipulate that 90% of trackers do a good job with well trained dogs but it is like everything else in life it is the 10% that screw it up for everybody.
Maybe some imagery will help. Take the hunter I alluded to, not a lot of money, just getting started hunting and he shot his first deer. He knows enough that he probably got a liver shot. It is his first deer ever and he wants to find it. He waits an hour or so and tries to track it. His trail peters out in a few yards. He backs out and calls his buddies for advice. His buddies say call old Joe Bob, he'll come over with Mauler his favorite pit bull and they'll find it for you. Joe Bob gets 40 bucks plus mileage just to show up. So now the hunter has to decide between trying to find his deer and taking money away from his family’s everyday needs, oh and there is no way to tell if Joe Bob knows tracking from apple butter. So what does he do?
I'm not putting it out there just to be a contrarian. I'm trying to stop innocent hunters from being taken advantage of. Have you ever said "If I only knew then what I know now?" Sure you have, so isn't it incumbent upon us to try and protect those that don't have a whole lotta "then" behind them and are trying to figure things out "now"?
How many of you have said "I went to the school of hard knocks"? Was it fun? Don't you wanna try to make it better for those who follow us? Why let somebody get "knocked around" if you can stop it? This is our chance to try and ensure a quality product.
And guess what else, we haven't even touched on the tough issues like tracking after dark, dispatching wounded game while tracking, tracking on public ground and what Bowtech alluded to, hunters crossing property lines with a tracking dog pursuing wounded game. If trackers are required to be certified and licensed they must demonstrate knowledge of the laws and ethics of tracking before they can be licensed.
OK, back to the young guy who was tracking his liver shot deer. There are several possible scenarios, 1: He looks up Joe Bob on the DNR website or hand book, sees that Joe Bob and Mauler are certified and licensed, he calls 'em up, they show up, he digs 40 bucks outta his well worn cammo pocket. They go out to his last known blood spot, Joe Bob puts Mauler on the track, 15 minutes later they find the hunters first deer dead in a thicket of multiflora rose so thick that they would never have been able to penetrate with out the help of Mauler. They drag out the deer, it isn't a P&Y buck, but it is his first deer and he couldn't be happier or more proud. Scenario 2: No DNR list, no way to tell other than word of mouth that anybody is worth spending the money on. The hunter calls up Joe Bob like his friend suggested. Joe Bob and Mauler show up, money passes hands, they search for 15 minutes, Joe Bob says "Boy, I think ya got him in the butt, but thanks fur callin me and be sure and tell yur friends 'bout me". The hunter is crest fallen. He thinks "If only there was a list of approved trackers, maybe this would have been different".
If only if only if only……
The ‘Bonker
hillrunner
PMA Member
Every year the government comes up with more and more ways to protect me from myself. The only thing it ever does is cost more money and make me feel less free . I'd just assume we keep things as simple (and cheap) as possible. Whether were talking tracking dogs, seatbelts, or 2nd hand smoke, let me decide what is good for me.
Thinkin Rut
PMA Member
thank you very much!!!
dedgeez
death from above
Dude, I’m about as responsible for the condition of the country as McDonalds is responsible for making kids fat.
The 'Bonker
[/QUOTE]
That is the attitude I love to hear. I'm sure you and all your liberal friends said the same thing when you voted for Obama, " oh its just one vote, what difference does it make"?
There in lies the problem, its not just you that thinks that way, If we continue to regulate and charge a fee for everything we do, your "innocent hunter" wont have the opportunity to even have a chance to go hunting.
DUDE, look at the big picture here!
The 'Bonker
[/QUOTE]
That is the attitude I love to hear. I'm sure you and all your liberal friends said the same thing when you voted for Obama, " oh its just one vote, what difference does it make"?
There in lies the problem, its not just you that thinks that way, If we continue to regulate and charge a fee for everything we do, your "innocent hunter" wont have the opportunity to even have a chance to go hunting.
DUDE, look at the big picture here!
Fishbonker
Life Member
Wow, I think I just got flamed. I kinda knew when I decided to share my opinions on this thread that it would eventually degenerate into a discourse on individual rights versus government regulation.
So be it.
How did you feel about the increased government restrictions placed on Wall Street after the collapse a few months ago? How do you feel about the increased regulation of deep water oil wells after the Gulf Disaster? Those are just recent incursions into our freedoms. What about the Lacey Act? Didn’t protect you but protected wildlife and is often pointed to as the reason we have game to hunt today. Was that OK or too much incursion? Pure Food and Drug Act? You like eating rotten meat and taking patent medicines that often do more harm than good? Was it OK that this act regulated that ice cream producers could no longer put chalk in their product to make it look more white?
My point is government intervention has been necessary to protect us from those that would screw us for profit. Where do you draw the line between incursion and intervention? My line zigs and zags from conservative to liberal depending on the issue. I want government to intervene and protect me from those that are out to screw me and I want government not to make incursions into my personnel freedoms but I want the government to intervene on my behalf to keep me from the incursions of others into my personal life . How do you assimilate that?
You assimilate it by how the regulation directly affects you. Take second hand smoke. I can now go to any restaurant in Iowa and not worry about being seated close to someone who needs to smoke. Sucks for the person that smokes but it is good for me. Who is the winner and who is the loser? Depends on what side of the line you are on.
OK, I am a pragmatist. In the end the rules will probably be way less than I think are necessary but way more than some of you think are necessary. I guess in all things compromise is the outcome.
As far as the McDonalds comment liberals wanna blame McDonalds for fat kids, I wanna blame the parent who allows the kid to eat that much crap.
My innocent hunter will have more opportunities to go hunting because he won’t be paying his hard earned money for phony baloney crap that some unscrupulous entrepreneur foisted on him in an unregulated nation. That’s the big picture.
No wait, the big picture has gotten lost in all these forensics. We all agree in principal that using dogs to help track dead or dying game is a good idea. What we disagree on is the route we need to take to get there.
I know the truth about whom I voted for, you only think you do.
The ‘Bonker
So be it.
How did you feel about the increased government restrictions placed on Wall Street after the collapse a few months ago? How do you feel about the increased regulation of deep water oil wells after the Gulf Disaster? Those are just recent incursions into our freedoms. What about the Lacey Act? Didn’t protect you but protected wildlife and is often pointed to as the reason we have game to hunt today. Was that OK or too much incursion? Pure Food and Drug Act? You like eating rotten meat and taking patent medicines that often do more harm than good? Was it OK that this act regulated that ice cream producers could no longer put chalk in their product to make it look more white?
My point is government intervention has been necessary to protect us from those that would screw us for profit. Where do you draw the line between incursion and intervention? My line zigs and zags from conservative to liberal depending on the issue. I want government to intervene and protect me from those that are out to screw me and I want government not to make incursions into my personnel freedoms but I want the government to intervene on my behalf to keep me from the incursions of others into my personal life . How do you assimilate that?
You assimilate it by how the regulation directly affects you. Take second hand smoke. I can now go to any restaurant in Iowa and not worry about being seated close to someone who needs to smoke. Sucks for the person that smokes but it is good for me. Who is the winner and who is the loser? Depends on what side of the line you are on.
OK, I am a pragmatist. In the end the rules will probably be way less than I think are necessary but way more than some of you think are necessary. I guess in all things compromise is the outcome.
As far as the McDonalds comment liberals wanna blame McDonalds for fat kids, I wanna blame the parent who allows the kid to eat that much crap.
My innocent hunter will have more opportunities to go hunting because he won’t be paying his hard earned money for phony baloney crap that some unscrupulous entrepreneur foisted on him in an unregulated nation. That’s the big picture.
No wait, the big picture has gotten lost in all these forensics. We all agree in principal that using dogs to help track dead or dying game is a good idea. What we disagree on is the route we need to take to get there.
I know the truth about whom I voted for, you only think you do.
The ‘Bonker
Last edited:
singlecoyote
Proud member of the IBA
The phrase "choose your battles" comes to mind here.
I just don't know how much impact having or not having "licensed" dog handlers and dogs would have on the overall quality of our state's deer hunting.
Will the dogs have to complete a comprehensive training program to be certified? :grin:
I just don't know how much impact having or not having "licensed" dog handlers and dogs would have on the overall quality of our state's deer hunting.
Will the dogs have to complete a comprehensive training program to be certified? :grin:
This new law has inspired me to go out and buy a couple of tracking dogs. I charge by the mile, and its 50 dollar minumum for me to even load the dogs.
Both dogs are guarantee'd.
Nice looking dogs you got there. I went out and bought me a tracking dog too. He has been doing a really good job. Here is a video of him in ACTION!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAmSf-oiRVs
dedgeez
death from above
nannyslayer
New Member
Thinkin Rut
PMA Member
Hopefully we can intervene in November and then again in two years from November!!!