PDA

View Full Version : Il Nr Bow Tags


Myk
Tue August 24th,2004, 05:16 PM
The number is supposed to be limited to 15,000 this year (increase from last year).

They issued them on a stupid first come first serve phone call (it should be a lottery or sold through outfitters) and sold through Bass Pro. The system messed up and told some people they were sold out when they weren't.
They did sell out all 15,000 tags over night though.

The first rumor I've heard is that they were calling people who got the false message and offering them tags. I understood that, the state screwed up. I don't think an extra thousand or two will make that big of a difference.
These rumors were mostly filled with "friends of friends", but it did also come from a NR who said he got the state to tell him that after a lot of pressing.

The next rumor I from that same guy was that he called Bass Pro to check. They were ready to send him another tag! This wasn't a friend of a friend.

Part of all the rumors ties into an outfitters organization who sued AZ for limiting NR tags for big game. IL is afraid of getting sued.

The problems I have with this is that they did not implement an emergency rule to increase or remove the limit so we have no say in it. If true, once again the ILDNR removes due process of the law.

Those 15,000+ NR hunters are not paying $225 to hunt does or even young bucks. They are going after trophies. Most of those NR hunters will be going to the same three counties.
Can those counties handle an unknown number of trophy bucks getting taken? Aren't residents limited to 2 bucks a year for that very reason? Didn't eastern IL have a problem because of the OTC tags being used for only bucks?
We already know what happens when we issue unlimited amounts of either sex tags.

Residents are still limited to the amount of OTC tags printed, once they're gone, they're gone. Why should NRs get no limits on the amount of tags issued?
The more I hear the more it sounds like they did remove the caps.

Is IL selling out IL deer hunters in favor of the guides and outfitters, much like they sold out the southern IL duck hunters to favor the clubs? I'm not finding any answers and I don't suspect I will until it's too late. But judging by last year's southern duck hunt, I wouldn't put it past them.
I'm thinking Blago is using Bumsfeld to sell out IL hunters and our deer herd to balance the budget. I bet we see nothing from the increase sales, that's a pretty safe bet since we didn't see anything when they increased the price.

Mossyhorns
Tue August 24th,2004, 07:57 PM
I got a flier earlier in the year from a archery club with the proposals for 2004-2005.Removing the cap was one of them

Myk
Tue August 24th,2004, 08:33 PM
Here are the rules. The adopted one has the 15,000. There isn't a new proposed or an emergency rule.

http://dnr.state.il.us/legal/rule-status.htm

"Section 670.20 Statewide Deer Permit Requirements
c)
The number of nonresident combination archery deer permits shall be limited to 15,000 and based upon such factors as public recreation, biological balance, numbers, health, deer herd recruitment, and historical data."

Maybe what you got was about going to the unlimited OTC antlerless tags for them. I think that is new.

Mossyhorns
Tue August 24th,2004, 08:51 PM
I just had it in my hand earlier today.And can not find it now to save my life.I'm still looking.

Mossyhorns
Thu August 26th,2004, 12:57 PM
Here is something i9 just pulled up

To All Illinois Deer Hunters

Bill HB0434

Synopsis as Introduced
Amends the Wildlife Code. Provides that there shall not be a limit
on the number of resident or non-resident archery deer hunting permits. Effective immediately. For more details and view full text follow this link. I got this from

Myk
Thu August 26th,2004, 01:36 PM
http://www.legis.state.il.us/legislation/b...864&SessionID=3 (http://www.legis.state.il.us/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=0434&GAID=3&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=864&SessionID=3)

That would be very stupid. We need limits, that's why we aren't in the shape that PA, WI, MI and all the other non-trophy states are in.
Those limits are what we pay the DNR for.

Plus, without limits how would they know how many to print, or would we go to something like Alabama and just have it be a deer a day with our hunting licenses?

That $25 nr tag is only for the bonus OTC antlerless. The buck tag is $200 and as far as I know they have to buy a complete set for $225 this year.

Mossyhorns
Thu August 26th,2004, 02:34 PM
That sounds more better then for the bonus tags.

At this point and time i think it's all about funds in the states pocket

jmclark
Mon September 20th,2004, 10:27 AM
I am sorry to hear that you guys are going through what we in AZ went through earlier this year. Why wouldn't the law side with tax paying residents of that state? The lawsuit even delayed the fall draw here until AZGFD figured out how to comply with the judges decision. Will let you guys know what they do here.

Mossyhorns
Wed September 22nd,2004, 11:22 AM
I was just reading up on an article about that.Over a group of hunters from New Mexico that feel it was unconstitutional to put a cap on Non-Res. tags.claiming the cap violated the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.And awarding permits based on residency is discriminatory.
And now Wyoming and Nevada face similar suits.

Wonder how these guys are going to feel when it hits their own state and they lose out on draws due to non res permits.
I can imagine this catching on like a wild fire

tcoop
Wed September 22nd,2004, 03:59 PM
I'm getting so sick of all the claims of discrimination. It is everywhere and for just about anything.

tcoop

Mossyhorns
Wed September 22nd,2004, 04:17 PM
I know what you mean tcoop,it's out of hand.Why some people think like they do i'll never understand.And the lawyers all to willing to handle the cases.$$$$$$$$$

Myk
Thu September 23rd,2004, 03:58 AM
The only thing is that those articles aren't telling you that it's NOT a group of hunters.
It's a group of outfitters. They're doing it only to line their pocket books.

What I heard about the AZ thing is that it was unconstitutional because they allow parts to be sold. So it was a free trade thing.
They are going to change that law and go back to limits.
Then they are going to jack up the NR tags to pay for the lawsuit.

The court that decided this was the infamous 9th. The same one that screws up Kalifornia.

Don't worry about boycotting the outfitters organization. That has already been done and as far as I know every one of their supporters has pulled their support.

Mossyhorns
Thu September 23rd,2004, 03:20 PM
It says here that the 9th Circuit Court in San Fran. agreed,reasoning that traveling hunters and trophy sales generate interstate commerce,and the district court in Phoenix then ruled the Arizona cap illegal.
So because of their greed we non res get to pay the price for it in the long run.

Myk
Thu September 23rd,2004, 09:02 PM
Perhaps the 9th thinks that states should get to charge non-residents taxes. Or maybe the residents of states will need to sue for that. Afterall, isn't it unfair that the people in a state have to pay taxes to pay to support and repair damage that the wildlife does in that state?
Seems that only charging people who live in your state taxes is being discriminatory to me.

Mossyhorns
Thu September 23rd,2004, 11:33 PM
Perhaps the 9th thinks that states should get to charge non-residents taxes

You live in a state ,it then represence you your taxed,you leave state,that state does not represent you,and would be taxation w/o representation.......LOL
I don't know,i just pulled that one from a hat.But it sounded good.

I just hate to see the increase in tags.I already feel we are charge too much for permits.I understand the good the money does.Just doesn't feel right having to pay for something that is born-grows and flurishes in the wild by it's self.
I think it was New York, i may be wrong or it has changed,but residents are allowed 2-3 deer per day on a regular hunting lic.Of course there is a possession limit.