T-Tags (Continued)
Kansas
Starting a new thread...
Hearing is today. I see they had a hearing for proponents and opponents.
So quick of turnaround, and so little information, that there is no way for a guy to prepare to go up and witness these meetings.
No results yet as far as I can tell.
I have gotten two personal responses and a couple robotic replies, basically saying to write snail mail letters or call them if I wanted to be heard in those offices.
Yes, I believe you may be right keepem. In some instances anyhow.
Dr. Tomb posted this on Facebook. "The bill to establish transferable Deer permits is on the move. It will have a hearing on 13 and 14 March in the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee (Proponents on Wednesday and opponents on Thursday)."
Just noticed the hearing isn’t until NEXT week.
Don’t let that stop ya! Keep flooding those Ag & NRC senators with emails and phone calls.
Ugh..another committee to email.
In case you missed it in the last thread:
Ag and NR Committee
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Received the Legislative "update" email yesterday, here's a little more info on the hearings.
"The bill passed on House Final Action 63-60 on Feb. 27, 2019. The bill was withdrawn from the Senate Committee on Commerce and referred the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources. Hearings are scheduled as follows: Wednesday, March 13, 2019, 8:30 a.m., Room 159-S to hear neutral and proponents of the bill; and on Thursday, March 14, 2019, 8:30 a.m., Room 159-S to hear opponents of the bill."
It would be great if folks could fill that room up on Thursday!
Im sure the outfitters, FB , and KLA will have a room full on Wed.
Plan to attend on Thursday if anyone would like to carpool. We are going to go up a day late against the pros. The pros will be there Wed. from FB, KLA, LOBBISTS, guides and outfitters like Rep. Corbet that fed a line of crap to the House that got a 63 to 60 vote. He said he would not benefit, HE IS IN THE HUNT FOR BUSINESS BUSINESS!!! We filled a hearing room a few years ago to get rid of this crap.
Members of the Senate NR committee will have had more experience with such issues, and not be as easily mislead by either side. My past Senator (McGinn) and current (Francisco) are currently serving.
Have tried calling and emailing Bud Estes from Dodge City who is on the committee but no response. He is buddies with a lot of the large farmers in the area who push for the outfitters with their wealthy clients. Don't see much help from him at all.
Planned to be there Thursday buy am now involved in driveing a friend to Topeka for daily cancer treatments so can't make it. hope we have a crowd and a receptive committee.
Got the following responses from Senators that I e-mailed....Susan Wagle's response is certainly interesting in terms of the Chairman's position:
Jason, I received your message. Most all of my messages agree with your stance, so probably will not support it. Best wishes......Mary Jo Taylor
Response from my District 30 Senator: Hi Jason, Thank you for contacting me. I am firmly opposed to HB2167 for several of the reasons you listed. I had spoken with the Chairman of the Ag & Natural Resources committee, he remains opposed as well. However, he is giving a courteous hearing to have both sides be heard. I don’t imagine it advancing. Thank you......Susan Wagle
Just got a robotic auto-reply from.....Dennis Pyle.
Everyone gets a robo from Pyle.
Jason Senator Bowers told me the same thing last week that Wagle told you. I guess we will see.
Any updates from this morning session and the pros?
Corbett and a few other reps or senators spoke, as did several outfitters, KLA and FB.
Good luck to all attending/speaking at the morning session. Thanks for sacrificing your time.
Really wish I could have made this one...
Please give us updates.
I would like to say thank you too!
Good turn out, as well as KDWPT, an outfitter from Texas came up to testify, several legislators at least one hunter - Doug Wilson
Mike, I’m curious as to the process.
I emailed several people and stated that I would be willing be willing to speak in opposition to this bill as a farmer. I never heard back from any of them.
During the crossbow hearings I was invited to speak. I traveled up to Topeka and spoke in opposition.
This may seem petty, but I was not going to travel to Topeka to “watch”. Do they randomly call people up to speak on the bill or do they have a list of attendees that were selected to speak?
Who was the outfitter from Texas?
Should be in the minutes of the meeting, Matt.
Thanks Doug, wish I could have made it. When will the committee decide if we wasted our time again?
Thanks , hope I did not do more harm than good. Doug
If anyone has a link to the minutes please share. I’m not seeing them posted anywhere.
Last minutes posted are from Feb 20th. Which means we will probably know results before minutes are ever posted.
Marci get’s it! Hope the others on the Committee do too! Her comments to me in returned e-mail are below:
Jason, Thank you for letting me know of your position on HB 2167, the bill to allow transfer of a landowner or tenant hunt-on-your-own deer permit to a non-resident hunter. There was very good testimony on this bill presented to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources during the two days of hearings this week. It was interesting that we heard from outfitters both in support and in opposition to the bill. Base on comments I have received (like yours) about this issue, I am not supportive of the bill.
Although we heard arguments that landowners who are providing the habitat and feed for this wildlife should share in the benefits, I understand that landowners already have opportunities to profit from leasing their land. I am convinced that allowing the transfer of tags to non-resident hunters would further reduce opportunities for resident hunters. While this does mean that we would lose some tourism dollars, the resident hunters spend money throughout the year in our state. I think one of the most important concerns is that we maintain state government as the trustee of our natural resources for current and future generations.
Again, thank you for your comments. Marci Francisco (Kansas Senator, 2nd District)
I was just getting ready to post crested... she sent me the same reply.
Appreciated her response and greatly respect her stance on this bill! Common sense.
I wonder who the outfitters were in opposition and what their reasons were?
Same as yours, no, i did not attend. Yes i did contact my rep. and voice my concerns and opposition. As well as thru other media.
I had 1 NR hunter contact me with questions about #2167, he had several concerns. I encouraged him to write the committee members., sent him a link with their names and emails. He sent email letters of opposition to all of the committee members.
Tuesday is when there will be a vote. Continue to send emails, make calls. It is important to show them we have not gone away.
Marci has a great reputation with the wildlife, state parks and tourism divisions of the agency. She’ll fight commercialization of wildlife tooth and nail. And for those who think one political party is far superior and the other pure evil...she’s a liberal.
Liberals are probably better in that regard, right?
Ks Farm Bureau's self centered policy.
I find that if it wasn’t for gun control and abortion I would vote Democrat more often.
I’ve often told friends how it’s funny that Kansas political “conservatives” seem to be the biggest threat to conservation.
I have sent my emails. At least the KBA is sending email blasts to let us know of the issue so us awful NR"s can help fight side by side our resident brothers who love to hunt deer in KS.
Sent 10 more this morning, wish us luck and sanity.
Tabled, (means no action from that committee) not much support. Corbett or any rep or senator has the right, and ability, to tack it on to another bill. It could be on another KDWPT bill or commerce. If so, those supporting and those opposed can again get involved.
Be ready to contact the house again. Like Michael said, it will likely get tacked onto another bill. Need to convince some of the representatives 'yes' votes to switch to 'no' votes when this happens. I am aware of at least one that voted yes when it passed the house that said they no longer support after receiving more information.
Matt
Minor win, better than the alternative!
Get involved no matter where you stand on the issue.
I received another message today saying it was tabled and that they doubted it would be voted on in this years session.
If Kansas is like NY when it comes to these types of bills is when it is added to another bill a lot of time it gets a pass as they are pushing so many things get pushed through because those voting do not even realize what has been added and what has not. I hope you guys get it how you want it. I am happy having to draw for the privilege of hunting Kansas. I will add this though I am worried as it is getting harder to draw. I have had several friends not draw the last couple years. I had a point for 2018 which really helped. Keep the good fight!! Shawn
The best thing that can happen for Kansas is the draw and needing preference points that draw. I think the best hunting will be ahead of us. When it takes 5+ points that draw hunters may get very selective.
This doesn't look good, Randy can you "translate"?
HB2167 - This bill would require the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism to establish a system to approve and administer the transfer of regular landowner or tenant hunt-on-your-own-land big game permits to a nonresident of the state of Kansas solely for the purpose of hunting white-tailed deer. The transfer would not occur until all nonresident permits were issued in the management unit where the landowner/tenant permit was issued. The Department opposes this bill. This bill was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Labor and Economic Development. A hearing was conducted on Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2019 and this bill passed as amended out of committee. The bill passed on House Final Action 63-60 on Feb. 27, 2019. The bill was withdrawn from the Senate Committee on Commerce and referred the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources. Hearings were conducted on Wednesday, March 13, 2019 to hear neutral and proponents of the bill; and on Thursday, March 14, 2019 to hear opponents of the bill.
The Senate committee recommended that substitute bill be passed on March 22, 2019 using the original bill as a shell vehicle. The bill now contains provisions related to Commercial Industrial Hemp. The substitute bill passed as amended on Senate Emergency Final Action 39-0 on March 27, 2019.
How come nobody heard anything about this? I’m I reading it right that it already passed??
It was amended and a new bill was substituted. The entirety of the text of the original bill was scrapped and the "shell" was used to build a new bill addressing commercial hemp production. The bill no longer contains any mention of deer hunting. It's a completely different bill now. That's the end of transferable deer tags as it pertains to this bill. A new bill would have to be introduced and the process would start over.
Good news for deer hunting in Kansas
The Senate tossed out the t-tags and replaced it with a substitute subject matter, commercial hemp growth.
T-tags are dead for another year it seems on HB#2167 anyhow.
That is great news Randy. I saw that it had been added to a new bill and was afraid they had snuck it through on a bill that everyone wanted passed. Thanks for the information.
One should never witness legislation or hot dog manufacture.
Awesome, thanks for the clarification!
Matte do you seriously think the best hunting is ahead of us? We will never see hunting anywhere close to what it was 25 plus years ago. We will never see hunting anywhere close to what it was 15 years ago.
There are still some very nice deer in SE KS. Maybe not as many as fifteen twenty yrs ago but it's still great hunting
As much as I think there are too many nonres tags available. The biggest threat to the herd in SEK remains the ridiculous number of doe tags available. It took us almost 7 years to recover from ehd wiping out the mature does in our neck of the woods. The recovery would have been quicker without people being allowed to shoot 5 or 6 does apiece.
It is great hunting to people who do not have a long history of hunting here. But to those who hunted prior to 1995 it is pretty poor. All I can do is judge my hunting experience today to the best years I have had, and there is no comparison. Not even remotely close. Now hunting might be good to some who are willing to shell out thousands of dollars, but hunting is not worth that much to me. More important things in life.
The hunting has never been better in my neck of the woods.
N2- they could still try to amend it into another bill, we need to continue to watch what they are doing and be ready to respond.
Absolutely correct Randy. Nothing is ever dead in our legislative system.
Thanks again for all your work on these matters.
I definitely cant compare to what Jeff speaks of because I have only been hunting Kansas the last 10 years and yes everything about hunting in Kansas is better then the terrible hunting in NJ. Spending the money is worth it to me just to come out and hunt in piece with the possibility of killing a good mature buck. I also have good friends that I enjoy spending time with. With that said I do see a lot of great up and coming bucks, each year and do see some mature bucks on camera and while hunting. I do not have a ton of doe so I never shoot them. I seem to have more bucks then doe. I am definitely not one of those guys who needs to just shoot a deer. I have gone home empty handed because of that and enjoyed myself the same when I go home with a deer. I am also glad to hear the good news guys.
Thanks to all of you for the correspondence with rep's, and thanks for the clarification guys! I really think Brad Loveless had a something to do with squashing this. I have no solid evidence...just a hunch...but if so, thank you Brad!
Brad, Chris Tymeson, as always, Randy speaks the lingo well, key members on the Senate committee sealed the deal. No doubt the calls and emails helped and showed so many people care about how our national resources are managed.
Way to go!!! Good for everyone!! I love hunting Kansas but I totally understand where you guys are coming from, I am glad it worked out! Shawn
Same song, same dance next year no doubt. I actually like most of that which Rep.Ken Corbet endorses, but when it comes to unlimited Whitetail tags, he is highly mistaken to push for T-tags for kand owners and outfitters. Im impressed and proud of all who fought to defeat this legislation.
I would really like to hear his thoughts on the subject, now that its gone for this year. Does he hear the people in opposition, or does he plan to continue to push this legislation??
A journalist/reporter should ask him.
I too would like to know as well. I had always thought of his business as reputable and after this last push I will not be a customer and would not recommend anyone else to his operation. I would love to hear his stance and why he is seeking it again.
It is, and always has been an a concerted effort to turn wildlife into the next cash crop for the commercial hunting industry and segments of the agriculture industry. They want to "own" the deer, sell them like a commodity. We must never allow individuals to control our wildlife resources that way.
They have used the same sad claim(s) that they are asking for the transfer tags to allow NR friends and family to hunt their land yet are against making them land specific. They claim they are offering a solution to reduce car/deer accidents- deer crop damage (the most obvious BS! they've used). You do not reduce the herd size selling your prize bull, you sell off the heifers. They are against the issuance of additional antlerless tags, they only want more NR buck tags.
Corbet's claim that t-tags would help landowner/hunter relations and improve chances of resident hunter land access was nothing more than laughable. Never known a resident looking to buy a scalped fee deer tag.
