Repeal of the 4-point rule

“The good news is, it will NEVER pass in Mn if it’s on the same bill as 2 lines. I can promise you that.”

Well, this DID jump its first major hurdle. I recommend contacting your representative and voiceing your displeasure. Xecute put a list of committee members together in his post.

Also it blows me away that the argument against 2 lines in MN was that when using live bait fish will swallow the baits if you do not catch them right away. So what did they do, add a provision that you CAN use 2 lines but NOT when trolling! Trolling is the least harmful to the fish and they hardly ever swallow a bait when trolling. These people have NO clue and should not be deciding what we can and cannot do in the outdoors!!

There is also wording in there taking away the rights of the DNR to make any of these decisions in the future! I am completely blown away by their arrogance!!

i get disgusted more and more everyday….let the biologists and proper agencies do the job that they were trained to do…Keep the politics out of it. As a person of 23 years old i get scared to see where our state will be in fifty years. I was all for the sportsmans tax increase two years ago, because i thought it allow MN to make necessary changes similar to what Missouri has done 20 years ago. Now with politics and the arts i dont know what will happen

i was apposed to 2 lines but with these ad-ons i could live with it

Ask people that hunt in Wisconsin how they feel about Wisconsin Biologists that were responsible for “counting deer”!

Guys – Very important that you go here http://www.change.org/petitions/support-the-continuation-and-expansion-of-antler-point-restrictions-in-minnesota-sf-943-and-hf984#comments
and sign up if you want the APR to continue its 3yr pilot program. Please ink your name. I have had discussions with the Representatives who are trying to overturn this and it disgusts me to know what their political agendas are. The rep I spoke with talked to me like I was in Kindergarden and I corrected him on a half dozen political misstatements as well as asked him a half dozen questions he could not answer. Its one thing to not believe in the APR rule as everyone is entitled to their opinion. It is another thing to be choosing against it because a completely different agenda. “You wont find the cure for cancer if you dont put it through a trial” It is worth at least that much!
Thanks

Quote:

---

Guys – Very important that you go here http://www.change.org/petitions/support-the-continuation-and-expansion-of-antler-point-restrictions-in-minnesota-sf-943-and-hf984#comments
and sign up if you want the APR to continue its 3yr pilot program. Please ink your name. I have had discussions with the Representatives who are trying to overturn this and it disgusts me to know what their political agendas are. The rep I spoke with talked to me like I was in Kindergarden and I corrected him on a half dozen political misstatements as well as asked him a half dozen questions he could not answer. Its one thing to not believe in the APR rule as everyone is entitled to their opinion. It is another thing to be choosing against it because a completely different agenda. “You wont find the cure for cancer if you dont put it through a trial” It is worth at least that much!
Thanks

---

Done deal thanks for posting this!

Thanks Justin for posting the link. My comments from the fishing side.

This was discussed for a few years before instituting and was also voted on and it passed! The majority have already spoken and a lot of money was spent before the rule was put in place, again the majority wanted a change! I to have talked with the representatives that Steve mentions and they do not have a clue on the benefits. The bill also takes away the rights of the DNR to make these decisions. Why hire biologists into the DNR if the legislature obviously knows more about fisheries and wildlife biology!

I personally think moving the season out of the rut is a better idea than the 4pt. rule but one or the other needs to happen. This rule is about a better quality deer herd that has a side affect of bigger bucks. If there are more bucks and less does, only the dominant bucks will do the breeding and the best quality genetics are passed on. Its simple biology that is not hard to understand. Some mentioned here that they just want meat, well shoot the does there are plenty of tags. Why the need to shoot that little 6 pt. to only throw his antlers into the corner of the garage.

Scott – I know exactly what you mean. PM me your email address if you want and I will send you my emails between the representative and myself and Lou C. I cant post them here. Regardless, they have one argument and they think that is popular opinion.

Food Plot Planning and tonight. Doesnt get any better!!!

The bottom line is “Too much government!” And people who don’t know anything about managing a herd of anything.
Does a cattle rancher make steers out of his best bull calves?
No. He saves them for breeding his cows to improve the genetics of his herd.
Same goes for deer.
Just sayin’
WKW

Quote:

---

The bottom line is “Too much government!” And people who don’t know anything about managing a herd of anything.
Does a cattle rancher make steers out of his best bull calves?

No. He saves them for breeding his cows to improve the genetics of his herd.
Same goes for deer.
Just sayin’
WKW

---

That raises the question…Naysayers are calling the DNR government. While I would tend to agree somewhat as they are the “regulators” I would put my pennies in the jar of the DNR long before I would put them in the jar of Rep. Drazkowski who really is “Big Gov’t”.

So were there any other IDO members there at the meeting tonight? Overall I think it went very well, I feel that the supporters for APR were represented very well. Senator Jeremy Miller asked if the two sides could reach some kind of compromise, someone came up with the idea to along with the youth being exempt from APR add 65 years olds and the handicap to that list as well, that is a compromise I could live with.

Couldn’t make it Steve, but that is certainly a compromise I could live with as well.

Quote:

---

That raises the question…Naysayers are calling the DNR government. While I would tend to agree somewhat as they are the “regulators” I would put my pennies in the jar of the DNR long before I would put them in the jar of Rep. Drazkowski who really is “Big Gov’t”.

---

X100% and exactly what I told Steve D.

Any new news on this? Did they get rid of the APR’s? It would be a shame if they did. I was hoping it would move to our area in a year or two in Otter Tail County.

Without a doubt, I would move the season out of the rut.

Way to easy for any hunter to whack any buck. Why would we want to whack the bigger bucks that could do the breeding for us??

Quote:

---

Any new news on this? Did they get rid of the APR’s?

---

It is looking very good that ARP will stay in place with a couple of changes, the last day of the session is tomorrow (Mon May 23rd) so we should know soon. From what I understand the following is what will be in place for the 2011 deer season.

APR will continue for the 2011 & 2012 trail period with the following change…….. exempt disabled hunters and hunters age 60 years or older from the antler point restriction.

Also the rule for no cross tagging of bucks will stay in place.

The 300A season will continue to be a nine day season.

Here is the actual wording on the bill……..

“Sec. 67. DEER HUNTING RULES.

(a) If the commissioner of natural resources adopts a rule applicable for the Series 300 deer permit areas that imposes an antler point restriction for taking antlered deer, other than that imposed under Minnesota Rules, part 6232.0200, subpart 6, the rule must:

(1) exempt disabled hunters and hunters age 60 years or older from the antler point restriction; and

(2) expire after the 2012 deer hunting season.

(b) The commissioner of natural resources may not reinstate an antler point restriction for the Series 300 deer permit areas, other than that imposed under Minnesota Rules, part 6232.0200, subpart 6, after the 2012 deer hunting season unless the legislature approves the antler point restriction.

(c) The commissioner of natural resources shall amend Minnesota Rules, part 6232.1300, subpart 3, item B, to allow legal bucks to be taken in season option A for a nine-day period beginning the Saturday nearest November 6. The commissioner may use the good cause exemption under Minnesota Statutes, section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3), to adopt rules under this section, and Minnesota Statutes, section 14.386, does not apply except as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 14.388.”

Page 28, line 28, before “Minnesota” insert “(a)”

Page 28, after line 30, insert: ” (b) Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 239.791, subdivision 16, as added by S. F. No. 1115, if enacted, is repealed.

EFFECTIVE DATE. Paragraph (b) is effective the day following final enactment.”

Renumber the sections in sequence and correct the internal references

Amend the title accordingly

Dill moved to amend the Hackbarth amendment to S. F. No. 943, the fourth engrossment, as amended, as follows:

Page 2, delete lines 27 to 36

The motion did not prevail and the amendment to the amendment was not adopted.

The question recurred on the Hackbarth amendment to S. F. No. 943, the fourth engrossment, as amended. The motion prevailed and the amendment was adopted.