Discussion in 'Iowa Whitetail Conference' started by Rjack, Feb 11, 2019.
I started the applause after your response. Very well said.
I have been to several of these meetings and it is my perception that the DNR does listen to this input, at least in a general sense. Keep in mind that they get a fair amount of conflicting opinions, so even if they "listened" 100% there would still be some dissatisfaction. I applaud their effort and intend to continue to participate in the future. (And it isn't often that I compliment government employees! )
Yeah, they listen until you bring up blood tracking and then shut down comments because the DNR officer doesn’t like walking his dog on lead and wants the law to stay a grey area. very disappointing Iowa City meeting, totally different mood from last years meeting.
FWIW, I was at the same meeting and I didn't see it that way.
Yeah? I might have been extremely caught off guard. I thought “we aren’t touching that with a 10 foot pole” was pretty clear.
You’d have thought someone brought up changing gun season to the rut...
Oh come on. Shooting 100 yrds. A lot of baloney regarding Crossbows and ignorance on the weapon. Has less of an effective range than vertical bows. Sure stupid people may try crazy things. But there is "Stupid" no matter what the weapon. I have no personal reason to want them included. I just think they have their place as a bow and arrow. One shot. Effective kill range 30 yrds or less. Maybe 40 if you have good eyes. Not worried bout all my trophies being taken by gun hunters that will run out and buy one. Don't have many "Trophies" around here anyway. And our drought was not funny. Pretty fair now, but we will have to see what Summer brings.
I took that comment as the DNR personnel wanted to remain neutral on the topic, realizing that there have strong opinions both ways on this subject over the years. From there though, I thought the conversation was cordial and just fine. People expressed themselves on the subject and shared their concerns in an appropriate manner IMO.
"Less of an effective range than verticle bows". That right there makes me question anything else you say.
I know 2 older hunters, neither are me, and they hunt the same amount of time in the same timber and rotate stands. The one with a crossgun shoots AT LEAST 5 times the deer that the hunter with a real bow does every single year. That is all I need to know about the "effective range" of crossguns.
He actually said "I " not "we". His comment about his lab was more directed toward someone leashing up their untrained dog to try and track wounded deer. As I recall his comment was his dog isn't leash trained and would be impossible to control. The dog would end up pulling him through the woods.
As far this years meeting remember it was a different format than last year. When you brought up dog tracking the whole room was listening not the smaller groups as in the past. As soon as you brought up tracking the mood in the room changed and not for the better. I don't think the DNR cut off the comments I think those with comments made them and that was it. I've said this before, I think everyone agrees on the concept but is leery of the practice. Only time will tell in regards to the practice.
I think you should rejoice in that a bill that was for all intents and proposes dead in the water a week ago has new life because those of us that agree to the concept have gone to bat for you and now look, it passed the sub. The bill still has a very long way to go. Take a step back, take a deep breath, and keep after it, just try to dial back on the rhetoric a bit. Hearts and minds, hearts and minds.
I don't want to pile on, but I think Bonker's comments here are very sound and worthy to be strongly considered. (For the record, he and I were sitting next to each other in the meeting last night.) I too sensed a mood change in the room when the dog tracking subject was brought up and a show of hands was asked for. That, to me, came across as a little forward and I suspect others may have felt the same way and then cooled a little bit on the subject.
Also, bear in mind, some of us have been to several of these DNR meetings over the years and many of them have had reps present on behalf of dog tracking and to be perfectly honest, in at least two of those meetings the two guys repping dog tracking came on pretty strong and essentially talked down to all of those that didn't agree with them OR did support them with some provisos. Frankly, the brusque approach did little to win others over. At that time, due 99% to the fact that the proposed legislation did not include a provision for the trackers to have to get permission from the property owners, I was also opposed and the "discussion" that night did little to persuade me that I should favor dog tracking.
Once there was a provision for needing permission to go onto private property AND the fine was increased to something has at least some meaning, I am all for it. I really don't care if someone uses a dinosaur to find a wounded animal, I hope they do recover them, just don't traipse across my private property without permission to do so. As was mentioned last night in the meeting, people like me that have concerns aren't worried about the legitimate dog trackers, we are though quite concerned about potentially giving an "opening" to the less than honest people that are out there and WOULD seek to exploit any loopholes opened to them.
Just one other thought, which may be unique to me, I could care less what other states allow, in fact, I would tend to be leery of what is kosher elsewhere in this country as Iowa has a deer hunting scene that beats just about all of them. About the last thing I would be persuaded by is what others, elsewhere have done as I certainly do not want a scenario like is found in so many other states. I hope the bill, as currently written is successful, good luck!
The dishonest don’t need this bill for a window of exploitation. I’d bet anything that DNR officer has been using his dog and doesn’t want to use a leash. My intention was not to browbeat anyone, and I may not have opened as I intended. I donated bone marrow yesterday and was out of sorts, but felt attendance and keeping the topic in discussion was important enough to get out of the house. The past two years have been spent trying to get as much information out as possible. I don’t think anyone who has ever used the services of a tracking dog has felt they weren’t worthwhile, and a significant number of people don’t realize dogs can be used this way.
Frankly I’d rather not use a leash either (bringsel is so much nicer) but this entire rewrite has been about compromising and meeting as many needs as possible. There was a LOT of opposition to increasing the fee as there’s already a substantial fine for trespassing.
Finally, it’s not just about what other states are doing, but the rest of the world. Much of the world is flabbergasted that we have to fight for this, where they’re from, it’s so common sense it’s required.
Wow. I understand a person's passion for something they believe in with all their heart but to malign a Conservation Officer in this way? You aren't doing you or your cause any favors. Dial it back and get it passed.
Perhaps I misunderstood your meaning but the insinuation is that the officer was breaking the law.
He’s not breaking the law as the law is written now. It’s a “grey area”. I’m not maligning him, I agree with him in many ways. I understood exactly what he said.
Unfortunately, the law isn’t grey enough. If it was, it wouldn’t need clarification. I’m taking away my personal options as a landowner with my own trained dogs for the chance of an opportunity to help more people find their deer. There were probably 30 injured deer that could have benefitted from a dog in my area on Bowhunters of Iowa this fall alone.
Lots of misinformation in this post - I sell and service crossbows and have tons of customers shooting them that have the DNR Handicap permits.
Killing shots on deer and turkey at 80+ yards is actually quite common with the newer bows - with speeds over 400 FPS (one is up to 470 FPS now) , accuracy of 3" at 100 yds, and lighted magnified scopes with range marked reticles this is not all that difficult to achieve. And these are not "STUPID" people as you claim in your post, many are very accomplished bowhunters that just can't shoot a regular bow anymore. Current Iowa law already makes it easy for them to get their crossbow permits so there really is no need to change any laws. The guys that need to use them already can very easily and for those that don't qualify as handicapped, the crossbow is just too powerful and accurate to be considered archery equipment and needs to stay classified more like a firearm and be used in Late Muzzleloader season as an alternate weapon and NOT in archery season.
It bothers me that those pushing hard for the tracking bill did not want to increase the fine.
Does that mean they don't plan to get permission and are already planning on trespassing?
Very simple way to avoid the fines - Do NOT cross the fence without permission.
You must have seen posts from my friends Curtis and Drew on that Facebook group. Had to have been 1 hit buck every other day
Yes!! I truly hope and expect to be very busy next year, not just tracking but hosting training days. Anyone with a good bird dog can train their dog to track. Time will tell...
Actually, the concern was that it would hold the bill up in ways and means. Every year so many groups want the bill their way or the highway and every year it dies for lack of support from people who complain but make no efforts to write their own version, or fail to realize there’s always someone out there that wants the opposite, and often their arguments are valid too. Every holdup puts the bill at risk of the real killer - time.
I’m a landowner too, and watch closely while the orange army walks my fence every fall like everyone else. I personally have no problems with the fine either way. Trespassing is far too easy to get away with already. I’m horrified by the number of stories of trespassers caught, especially with camera proof, and still not punished. If we can’t seem to enforce current trespassing laws, what good is a big fine for having a dog with you??
I’m glad it makes y’all feel better though. We really appreciate the support.
Any careful hunter does not take shots with a crossbow at 80 yrds. Much can go wrong between a loud crossbow and a deer at that distance. Vert bows are much more quiet. Vert bow hunters take longer shots on average. I have hunted with CrossBows. they are a "BOW", with one "ARROW", One Shot. You can't just sling another arrow in them for a follow up shot. They are not guns. They are an ancient weapon. All the innovations put on the original recurve bow are there to make shooting them easier. A trigger no less for release. This hatred of Crossbows is silly. Go to any Crossbow site and read about use. Few encourage shots beyond 30 or 40 yrds. We will never agree so no use in argument. Many other States have full inclusion, Only a matter of time for Iowa. Won't bother me a bit. Might be less wounded deer with them. In my last State they were hated with a passion by many. Now they are accepted as part of BOW Season. Have been for years now. Prejudice is hard to overcome but common sense wins out in the END.
Even the cross gun companies don't call it a bow anymore
Separate names with a comma.