Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Percentage of tags isn’t calculable here b/c of low public land %, and non-migratory big game animals.so would you guys be happy or unhappy if your DNR was forced to restrict buck hunting in an amount of tags equal to the amount of resident hunters that currently hold one each year, but then decided to shave off 10% for NRs, which means 10% of resident hunters go without a buck tag? would you be pro eliminating that 10% for NR? or pro keeping that 10% for NR?
Excluding Iowa as an outlier, look at all the states East of the Mississippi + the Great Plains states (TX, OK, KS, NE, SD, ND). There is a lot of private land, and NR tags are either unlimited, OR you get a NR LO tag. The land is leased to NR’s, outfitted to NR’s, or purchased by NR hunters. Who is harvesting more bucks these days? It’s wealthy NR’s.
Some of these states with substantial public (MN, MI, WI, PA, NY, VA), would I be happy if NR tags good on public land were capped at 10%? I’d be ecstatic. Mandated to 10%? Meh, not terrible. I’d prefer that over unlimited NR tags.