Contributors to this thread:
Here is the newest bill on Transferable Landowner tags. Kind of long but will keep you from having to look for it.
Session of 2018 HOUSE BILL No. 2743 By Committee on Agriculture
AN ACT concerning wildlife; relating to the transferability of deer permits. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Kansas: Section 1. (a) The secretary of wildlife, parks and tourism shall establish a system to approve and administer the transfer of regular landowner or tenant hunt-on-your-own-land big game permits issued under K.S.A. 32-937(g), and amendments thereto, from the original recipient of such permit to a resident or nonresident of the state of Kansas solely for the purpose of hunting white-tailed deer. (b) The transfer system established under subsection (a) shall meet the following requirements: (1) Any transfer shall not occur until all nonresident hunting permits issued under K.S.A. 32-937(l), and amendments thereto, have been filled in each management unit where the regular landowner or tenant hunt-onyour- own-land big game permit was issued for the applicable white-tailed deer season; (2) any recipient of a resident or nonresident hunting permit issued under K.S.A. 32-937, and amendments thereto, is not eligible for a transfer under this section during the applicable white-tailed deer season of the permit issued under K.S.A. 32-937, and amendments thereto; (3) the secretary of wildlife, parks and tourism shall allow the transferee to designate whether the transferee will hunt both antlered and antlerless white-tailed deer or only antlerless white-tailed deer pursuant to the permit transferred under this section; and (4) the secretary of wildlife, parks and tourism may charge a transfer fee, not to exceed the cost of an either sex white-tailed deer permit issued under K.S.A. 32-937(j), and amendments thereto, for transfers designated for antlered and antlerless white-tailed deer, and not to exceed the cost of the original permit for the regular landowner or tenant hunt-on-your-ownland big game permit under K.S.A. 32-937(g), and amendments thereto, for transfers designated for antlerless white-tailed deer. (c) The secretary of wildlife, parks and tourism shall not prohibit nor restrict the sale of regular landowner or tenant hunt-on-your-own-land big game permits under K.S.A. 32-937(g), and amendments thereto, by the original permit holder to a resident or nonresident, so long as the transfer
HB 2743 2 is approved under the transfer system established by the secretary of wildlife, parks and tourism pursuant to this section. (d) The provisions of this section shall expire on February 1, 2022. Sec. 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in the statute book.
So did this pass and is law or it’s just still in legislation?
Have they announced hearing or discussion dates Bob?
Why when you kill a skunk will it not stay dead.
I think the landowners should be able to regulate there own property, there is lots of money being lost due to the deer damaging there crops, if they want every deer killed off there property then let them, take the draw system numbers down and increase the landowner tags.
Land owners should NOT be able to market game tags, only the state should do that. The animals do not belong to land owners, animals belong to the citizens of Kansas.
Well I understand that but the STATES deer are costing farmers lots of money, so something needs to change. Farming is alot more important than deer.
Landowners have tons of control over deer harvests on their place. If they are worried about too many deer then they can lease to an outfitter who will gladly put hunters on their place all season long.
I think the real question isn't how many people can hunt a farm, but should the person who paid for the farm, taxes, and insurance have the right to free market tag sales. Landowners should love it and NR hunters will probably hate it.
Does this mean that a person (such as myself or anyone else on here) could buy a tag from their wife, son, father, FIL, MIL, and so on and basically have unlimited deer tags?
Does this apply to nr landowners
This is currently a proposed House Bill sponsored by the Agriculture Committee and was requested by the Kansas Livestock Association.
It has a hearing on Feb. 15th at 3:30pm.
If you read the wording in the bill only one permit will be allowed to any person. If you drew a permit you would not be eligible to receive one of the Landowner permits. I believe that it would apply to non resident landowners but they can already buy a landowner tag. But this might help the Non resident that owns land and wants to sell additional tags or one of his friends didn't draw he could get a tag for them. I'm not sure how this will work for the outfitters. I'm guessing this will make it easier for them to guarantee a tag for anyone that doesn't draw a tag.
KDWPT is against the bill, according to Sec. Robin Jennison.
Plenty of current avenues to reduce a deer herd outside of issuing some extra buck tags to a few unlucky NR’s that miss out in the draw. Really there’s only about two or three counties in the state where a current management situation could result in a landowner’s hands being tied from allowing enough permitted hunters to do the dirty work. And the state is seemingly willing to step in to help if all other avenues have been exhausted. A quick “kansas deer damage control permits” Google search will get you lined out... Terrible argument in favor of this proposal.
Thanks for the updates Bob and Mike. If the KLA can get this pushed through maybe I can talk to them about getting me a Riley elk tag every year, or a Missouri Breaks sheep, or AZ Strip muley tag. Because why not have unlimited permits for all?! Pretty pathetic if 80+% draw odds aren’t good enough.
Ok I'm all for farmer's and ranchers deciding what they do with there land. I know it isn't the easiest to manage a farm or ranch. But it would be interesting to see which of these guys that have proposed this bill have there land already leased out to outfitters or non resident hunter's. And if so which of them receive government subsidies and how much each one has received. All I know is when the profession I've chosen needs to cut labor cost or overtime I lose money and I don't see the state of Ks or the federal government sending me a check for lost wages. So if they get to sell the state's deer why shouldn't I be able to sell my to tag to the highest bidder . This is using their own logic.
The way I read the wording the price of the permit can’t be more than the state charges. I disagree with that as well, if a landowner gets permits he should be able to charge whatever he wants for them, way to much regulation.
Josh, a landowner can currently charge whatever he sees fit for access to his property. If he has pictures of a 200” buck and finds a licensed hunter willing to pay $10k to hunt it, then by all means go for it. Further, there are still units with leftover tags each year for the handful of applicants who don’t pull a tag. And, maybe I’m wrong here, but a seemingly endless supply of governor’s tags that anyone can purchase if they want it that bad. I can’t understand the mentality of side-stepping a professional’s recommendations for tag allotments because you’re butthurt you missed out once or twice a decade. Plenty of avenues to hunt whitetails every year, including picking an over the counter state or moving here and qualifying for a lifetime license as well. Hunting is a privilege...
They are “Commissioner’s Permits,” with an annual maximum of 7. Awarded to a conservation group through drawing. They can distribute how they like as long as they get max price.
JB: if this depredation from deer is so great can it be solved with one sold tag? Or five tags? Or ten tags? This is just another attempt to commercialize the herd that belongs to the citizens of Kansas.
Forgive me. I read too many reg books and listen to far too many hours of hunting podcasts and as a result terminologies get a little crossed at times. Good to know on the total of the tags. I recall at some point I was under the impression there were 8, but after the drawing it seems you never hear of their whereabouts or the monies they contribute. And then a handful of wealthy NRs show up in the NW corner of the state every year killing muleys with a rifle. So I got the impression more were in existence... Anyway, point being, there are plenty of opportunities to hunt deer in Kansas. Allowing landowners to call the shots on wildlife management will only briefly benefit a few bank accounts. Soon after we wouldn’t have a resource to argue about on here.
Seems like the state already has depredation permits for doe only available to the landowners who complain about crop loss. The argument about crop damage is the farmers own fault. They have the means necessary to take out excess deer, not just a pay to hunt a buck permit to line their pockets. At least this time there isn't a permit for every 80 acres they had before. Did not see where this system would tie that transferred tag to that particular landowners property as it should be.
I simply don't see how this would even be worth considering? It's a completely different situation than the transferable tags of yesteryear. Everybody already gets a tag! This must be just the first step in something much worse...
From a landowner and farmers standpoint....
Most outfitters I’ve dealt with do a poor job of managing deer. Putting their clients on semi-mature bucks and rarely taking does. And some are messy... leaving their litter and dilapidated tree stands/blinds to wash down the creek or lay in the weeds. I will never allow another outfitter on any of our property. Don’t think that’s the way to go if you want to control deer numbers.
Considering putting money in the farmers pocket... Im probably not going to do it if it were to pass, but man it would be tempting. Honestly, most farmers do not care about the deer herd and yes they can do a lot of destruction. I just spent nearly $1,000 on oil filters and air filters for two tractors (that’s NOT including the oil)... that will last about half way through the season. Commodity prices are NOT good. Fertilizer and seed is crazy expensive. I’ve already spent over $3k in fuel and I don’t have a seed in the ground.. Breakdowns are inevitable and expensive. I cannot blame any farmer for doing it. The budgets are tight guys... I know some farmers have very deep pockets, but not all.
I agree if the landowner/farmer is experiencing loss to their crop it is their own fault. It can be dealt with a number of ways. Just takes some work and a whole lot of fun.
In conclusion... I’m against the bill and I may be the only farmer in the state of Kansas that would be. If it passes, I sure won’t pass judgement on the farmer down the road if he sells a permit... I’m laughed at by a lot of farmers around here because of my love for it and they are probably right to think that way. I hope they do NOT allow a handful of tags per farmer/landowner.
I know quite a few farmers-ranchers and they would just shake their heads a grin at this proposal. Ya ain't gonna save the farm sellin a tag.
Don’t disagree that many will support it. Save the farm? Maybe not, but if you can sell a tag, your wife sell a tag, and then charge a land access fee to boot you just might pay the taxes.
Depends what county. I've got $200 taxes in one and $2,500 in the other. One thing I witnessed first hand with the transferable tags is that Outfitters would buy everyone the could get their hands on regardless if the hunter was using it in the right county or not. For instance, one guy was supposed to be hunting near Coldwater and he ended up hunting near Leon. I turned in the outfitter and was told by the warden that he would not pursue charges because there was no proof a trophy buck was taken with the wrong tags.
Wow... Always someone trying to beat the system.
This had better be policed well if this goes through.
Depredation permits... I just went and looked at the regulations on that. I couldn’t find anywhere where they were gender specific??? Can you shoot either sex with those??
Am I reading it correctly?
They used to be either. There was a tree farm east of Eldorado that liked to use those tags. My cousin leased land all around it and he said they killed off some big ones and ruined the area. They were supposed to turn the bucks into the state.
A question for clarification? Under this bill, If a NR is successful in the draw could he purchase another Tag from a LO???
drbonner if you read the bill it says behind the (2) they can not receive a tag if they drew or purchased a tag. I guess there might be a case where they could buy a doe tag but most get one of those with their either sex tag already. In my opinion this is just a bill that will grantee any outfitter will be able to provide a tag for any client that does not draw a tag. This bill is an endless supply of Non-Resident tags. Pretty cut and dry this has very little to do with helping a farmer pay his taxes or save his farm. Many of the farmers that are having problems with crop damage have done so to them selves because they lease out their ground to an outfitter and they do not harvest the doe's because the doe's provide the bucks. They don't want to loose the lease money they have coming in by allowing others to hunt their ground and harvest the doe's that are causing the problem, but they want to complain about the crop damage.
I can't believe this came up again.Don't try to say it's needed because of the damage deer cause,As a farmer and landowner blackbirds,turkeys and coons cause more damage to crops.If they need the money for taxes then theres other issues.taxes on farm land are cheap compared to everything else.Now if you have high taxes it's because you are classified recreation land.There are many thing to do so this will be re classified.From selling firewood or cutting harvestable trees to planting walnuts for future harvest. All the people supporting this bill need to be honest with themselves and everyone else and say it.Usually the predation permits are antlerless only and they will give them to just about anyone that ask for them but not many do.Only exception I have seen is around a tree farm they gave buck tags which now I would tell them to put up the double fence like around food plots or something.
I asked the designated biologist for SE Kansas last year about depredation tags, because I had heard a rumor that a neighbor had received a boatload of them. I was surprised when I talked to her, to hear her say that only 4 tags had been issued in her area last year (I called her in July) (I'm not sure how big her area is, but she did mention Chautauqua, Montgomery, and Elk counties). Depredation tags are only issued after the area biologist visits the affected farms and they don't issue them in mass she informed me. She also wanted information about the farm/farmer I was inquiring about.
Thank you for the common sense answer Habitat1.
Transferrable tags are nothing more than a ruse for providing access to those with deep pockets that want to hunt Kansas no matter what it costs, and by those that want to turn the demand to hunt here into another Kansas cash crop and to profit from it.
My wife and I co own some land . Could we buy and sell 2 tags ? My son ,his wife, my wife and I own a 1/4 togather. Could all 4 of us buy and sell 4 tags. I'm not at all in favor of the bill but the way it is written or at least the way I read it has way to many holes. I have to wonder if that was on purpose.
