Pressure?

s.davis said:
WIHA should be greatly reduced or eliminated. Residents should get a couple weekends of access before non-Residents.

Guiding/access to wildlife in exchange for money should be tightly regulated and the state should make a lot of money on it to fund wildlife conservation.

iWIHA should be greatly expanded. Landowners should be paid based on habitat/carrying capacity/usage, not acreage. Residents and non-Residents should have to pay for an iWIHA pass.

KDWPs shady practices with WIHA enrollments should be investigated.

I also think states should impose any nonresident restrictions reciprocally. So if you live in a state with non-resident draws for deer, you should have to draw to hunt deer when you go to a different state.

And P-R funds and other fed money should be apportioned to states based upon the tax base that they generate, not based on the states acreage.
Click to expand...
As a NR, I 100% agree residents should get some time before NR hunters can come in. My family owns around 600 acres in Eastern Kansas, but none live there.
 
Obi_Wan said:
Not sure I agree on the WIHA program, but definitely agree on the CRP. It would be more beneficial to habitat to keep the bulk of CRP in place. I could see allowing some haying but to hay an entire patch of CRP is just asinine if you want to manage habitat and bring in revenue from non-resident hunters (I realize many don’t want that, but the state might). Even if you don’t want NR hunters, there are better ways to manage the CRP than to allow that much haying.

How has/does wind farms affected habitat? I know solar farms are horrible for it.

If it helps, I saw some of the biggest deer of my life the first time I went to Kansas. but you’re safe. I’m only interested in birds.
Click to expand...
I leased a piece of WIHA today. It won't go into effect until the WIHA contract is up. State was paying $6 an acre for this tract and it was a good tract. I bowhunt this property and have had a couple of treestands stolen and a couple of run in's with non residents hunting in my stands. Lots of pheasants in the CRP on this property as well. There will be some disappointed bowhunters from Texas next year.
 
westksbowhunter said:
I leased a piece of WIHA today. It won't go into effect until the WIHA contract is up. State was paying $6 an acre for this tract and it was a good tract. I bowhunt this property and have had a couple of treestands stolen and a couple of run in's with non residents hunting in my stands. Lots of pheasants in the CRP on this property as well. There will be some disappointed bowhunters from Texas next year.
Click to expand...
Congrats on the lease. How long until the contract is up?

I haven’t had a run in with non-residents here, but I’ve walked up to my stand and found someone in it. Always the same excuse. “I didn’t realize I wasn’t on my side”. I’m like, did you cross a fence? Answer is always yes. So I remind them that if you cross a fence, you’re on the wrong side.
 
westksbowhunter said:
The WIHA program needs to end. And the gov't needs to find a way to keep CRP acres in conservation and not grazing and haying. NR deer hunting has been the biggest of enemy of upland hunting and all other forms of hunting in Kansas. The worst decision for resident hunting came down in 1995 when Kansas allowed NR deer hunting.
Click to expand...
How about this thought boys....
1. "Da Gubmint" pays $$ to farmers so that they do NOT farm their fields. This is called CRP payments.
2. Since Da Gubmint is paying the farmers, da gubmint is in essence "Leasing" that ground from the farmers...with your tax dollars...sort of anyway..(ya a stretch...stay with me).
3. If your tax dollars are paying the farmers to 'lease' the ground, then why would it not be open publicly to hunters?
4. Farmers don't like that idea? Don't enroll in CRP...easy...
Look...I know that would never probably fly...but stranger things have happened??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top