|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Mar 13, 2014 12:05:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Mar 13, 2014 12:07:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Mar 13, 2014 13:08:30 GMT -5
Tony Smith promised to post the results as SOON AS THEY CAME OUT on their face book page........ I wonder why he hasn't done so with them being announced over an HR ago?  |
|
|
|
Post by critter on Mar 13, 2014 13:10:43 GMT -5
Because there not the results he wanted
|
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Mar 13, 2014 13:16:51 GMT -5
Because there not the results he wanted  Although he did just post them a couple of MIN ago |
|
|
|
Post by hartman756 on Mar 13, 2014 13:25:11 GMT -5
The LPDMI crew is already claiming they can still convince the NRC to enact MARs because they have the majority vote
|
|
|
|
Post by wacnstac on Mar 13, 2014 13:32:01 GMT -5
Awesome. We can keep deer management in the stone age forever!
|
|
|
|
Post by critter on Mar 13, 2014 13:40:29 GMT -5
They did not get 66% so that should be the end of it but they will keep trying to pass it
|
|
|
|
Post by ridge on Mar 13, 2014 17:24:34 GMT -5
Not to differ with friends and brothers and sisters in this cause but the actual numbers were: NLP 61.7% for and 38% against SLP 54.9% for and 45% against  According to the DNR, 2,167 hunters participated which means 2.2% of the hunters in that area had a voice in this survey in the NLP. In the SLP, 1700 hunters participated which means one half of 1% of the hunters in that area had a voice in that survey. 3000 surveys were sent out in the NLP and 2300 were sent out in the SLP. Determine for yourself what kind of quality that meant for the survey. My opinion is that neither proposal would have had more than 35-40% support if the majority of hunters had been asked to participate. The following quote was from the DNR: "Support from hunters was insufficient to recommend implementation of antler point restrictions. . ." This statement was made in regards to both proposals. It was quite evident that at least two commissioners and one DNR chief are going to push for Hunters Choice as an end around maneuver to these results. The NRC established a two week limit for comments, as in the next two weeks, on APRs and HC. Unless we get the word out this will eliminate most hunters from having a say on these issues. I have a great many more observations from this meeting that I will put together on here in the coming days. However I feel the need at this time to grab a bite as I have not had food since this morning. (This old man gets grumpy without regular nourishment.) It would also be good to regroup and collect the thoughts from today. Savor the victory but be aware that there is a great deal to be done or the change makers will win yet. |
|
|
|
Post by ridge on Mar 16, 2014 22:17:01 GMT -5
The two week time limit was set for input on topics for the third party independent study on out of state MARs. It did not have to do with decision making by the NRC on MARs or HC in the next three months. I was in error with that statement.
The topics being looked at so far include:
Population Impact
Disease Risk
Changes in demographics/hunter participation
Economic Impact
If you would like something added to that list respond to the NRC by March 27th.
|
|
|
|
Post by daappleknocker on Mar 17, 2014 6:10:54 GMT -5
I think they should include the viability and accuracy of the current EMAR's survey process.
|
|
