New Columbia Deer Regs and The HFA

[fish]

Poison Snake - Some of this open land getting close to the HFA???

Seriously What you think about this...

Archers on city agenda
Council to weigh urban deer hunt.
By ARCENIA HARMON of the Tribune?s staff
Published Sunday, July 18, 2004
The Columbia City Council tomorrow will hear recommendations to change city ordinances to allow bow hunting for deer on some city-owned properties.
Under the recommendations, 225 acres of the city?s sanitary landfill off Peabody Road in northeast Columbia; 102 acres on the sewer utility property along Strawn Road; 100 acres of Grindstone Nature Area and Capen Park; and 60 acres at Twin Lakes Recreation Area are considered "huntable" by archers.
All of the properties were chosen based on the amount of available land and the amount of access to the public.
"For in-stance, up by the landfill, there?s a lot of land there that the city owns that?s not a high-traffic area," Columbia police Capt. Sam Hargadine said.
Hargadine was part of the advisory panel that finalized the recommendations. In addition to city employees, Missouri Department of Conservation staff members and members of the Columbia Archery Association met July 7 to finalize their recommendations.
The group was following up an April proposal that proposed opening up some city lands for hunting.
The urban hunting proposal is one option city officials are contemplating to control the urban deer population.
"I think the reason that they?re even considering this is ? the number of deer-vehicle accidents," Hargadine said. "If that wasn?t a problem then it probably wouldn?t be an issue."
Last year, Columbia police investigated 49 deer-vehicle accidents.
According to a written summary of the meeting, the recommendations would follow existing state Department of Conservation regulations.
Hunters would be required to get hunting permits, no motorized vehicles would be used in hunting and only portable tree stands would be allowed.
No hunting or field dressing would be allowed within 100 feet of a city-owned recreation trail or boundaries with private property.
"It?s a first step," Hargadine said. "It?s not going to eliminate the problem, but it should help."
If the council approves the recommendations tomorrow, the city staff would develop proposed ordinances to allow bow hunting for urban deer.
If the council approves the ordinance changes, the first deer season for bow hunters on limited portions of municipal property could be Sept. 15 to Jan. 15.

http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Jul/20040718News008.asp

[PoisonSnake]

Nope. What is really funny about this is how the Columbia Archer's Association has defended their stance by stating that they want to reduce deer vehicle collisions. Why don't they just come out and say they want to hunt prime city property and that they could really care a less about everything else. I have no problem with most areas they wish to hunt. I think the Twin Lakes 60 acres is pushing it a bit. If they could regulate the number of hunters, it might be possible to hunt that area. But, it is frequented by a lot of people and it backs up to residential areas, where the other properties do not.

[Warmouth]

Kansas City is way over due on this. where i live there is 90+ acres of woods behind my house and usually 4-6 deer per year get hit on the road within 1/4 mile of my driveway. i've had 12 deer at once in my backyard, 63 turkeys a couple of times. way over due on updating the regs. hell one evening in Nov. i almost hit the same 11 pt buck 3 times, (i kept turning around, he was a monster and was running smaller bucks away from a scrape, and multiple deer were crossing the road every time). come Feb. those city deer look awful pitifull, nothin left for them to eat, and they wander yards trying to find anything they can eat. i've seen a doe kicking her fawns away from a birdfeeder she was eating from, wasn't enough food for all of them i guess. all 3 had ribs showing.

[hobiecat]

PS, why do you think it's funny that

the Columbia Archer's Association has defended their stance by stating that they want to reduce deer vehicle collisions.

??

I think that's a pretty legitimate concern and stance. Columbia does have an extremely high deer population within the city limits and we see dead deer on the side of the road all the time. This is an effective way to help the community out, even if it does indulge some desires to hunt these areas.

Why would you be concerned with the 60 acres at Twin lakes?

[fish]

The Twin Lakes area is where I first started bowhunting course there was a city turd pond down there at that time. Could have bought 40 acres there next to it at $250 per. There was a bunch of deer in that area way back then.

[PoisonSnake]

Hobie: You and I both know that those fellows just want to hunt. Plain and simple. Sure, it sounds good when they say it, but that isn't their motive. They could care a damn less about the number of deer in Columbia's city limits. It is much like TTTim and his endeavor to help the herd last year. He defends his actions to his dying breath, I give him hell about his motive, then I find out he actually e-mails Lonnie Hansen to see if he was top-dog in the state of MO. Now, the 60 acres is in a residential area, you have folks in there 365 days a year on the MKT trail, etc... Do you think it will house a half dozen bowhunters at a time? Hence, my statement regarding the numbers allowed in. For example, one can bowhunt right behind the golf course here on campus. But, only 3 people are allowed to hunt at one time. Now, do you see where I am coming from? Probably not. Your non-killing ass wouldn't understand. PoisonSnake

[fish]

I agree there w/ PS. There is no way that unlimited numbers of hunters should be allowed. Heck there was just two of hunting on it and we were crowded an there was no Katy trail and no homes.

[hobiecat]

The fact that it is in a residential area is the exact reason it needs to be hunted. Those are the deer they are lookin to get rid of.

As far as how many hunters it can and will hold, don't you think that will take care of itself? I mean if you went out there to hunt and there were 10 other hunters out there, would you stay? I wouldn't.

[PoisonSnake]

Another issue with that particular 60 acres is parking. They can't access it without parking somewhere. They can park on Scott, Forum, or at Twin Lakes. All of these are public use areas. How are they gonna haul a deer out without someone (some troublemaker) seeing it. Rest assured it will happen and all hell will come down on someone from the antis. What I'm saying is let them hunt the other places, but they should reconsider the Twin Lakes area for a number of reasons.

[RB]

at smitty and hobie

[hobiecat]

Hobie: You and I both know that those fellows just want to hunt. Plain and simple. Sure, it sounds good when they say it, but that isn't their motive.

What the heck does motive have do with it?

How are they gonna haul a deer out without someone (some troublemaker) seeing it.

Cover it with a tarp.

[hobiecat]

Rest assured it will happen and all hell will come down on someone from the antis.

Screw'em. They'll change their tune after they wreck their Volvo and their auto insurance rates go up.

[Warmouth]

just like any other city "project" if an anti sees a carcass, they are going to have to get over it. people don't like road construction either, but they have to put up with it. people don't like sewer lines to be dug up in their yard, but it happens, and they have to put up with it.

if its for the good and safety of the PEOPLE in the city, then those who get all butt hurt over seeing a deer carcass will just have to deal with the cities progress, just like in any other city endeavor.

if the complaints get bad, they could make hunters drag out game after dark.

in a lot of states, urban hunting is a must, and 2-5 acre private properties are where most of the urban bowhunting occurs.

i look at cities like Town & Country, and see $15,000 of landscaping, the deer see groceries, and the car insurance companies see disaster. bowhunting is the cheapest (read free) way to get this problem fixed, and kill four birds with one stone. more hunting opportunities for us, less deer for the cities and individual home owners, and insurance co's to deal with. its a win/win/win/win situation.

[PoisonSnake]

In those areas bordering Twin Lakes, there is quite a lot of bowhunting already occuring. And, there are reports of trespass, etc... I can tell you of two specific instances that I am aware of. I can tell you that some folks are pissed off about the damage to plants and such, yet at the same time they will not welcome bowhunters in because they only have 2 or 3 acres to hunt, and chances are a deer is gonna run onto their neighbors property. That is where the problem begins, and landowners are more concerned about keeping their neighbors happy. Furthermore, the vast majority enjoy looking at deer regardless of the damage that they do to landscaping, etc... It amazes me in fact. In Wildwood, for example, you would think that everyone and their grandma would want to you to kill a few deer with a bow, but it is the "What will the neighbors think" mentality that defines what actually happens, regardless of the 49 car accidents in Columbia, Wildwood, Town & Country or wherever. Twin Lakes in Columbia is not the place to allow bowhunting for a number of reasons. The other properties can and should be hunted plain and simple. What is really funny about the Twin Lakes deal is that the article states that that particular 60 acres is cosidered huntable by the archers association. I wonder why that is? Make no mistake about it boys. These fellows see these "easy to kill" deer day in and day out. I have permission to hunt a 5 acre piece that borders Twin Lakes. Never have taken advantage of the opportunity. Bowhunting in city limits is a win/win situation. But, playing devil's advocate here, "I'll be damned if some degree of legislation that allows for public hunting allows for someone to trespass upon to another fellows property". In other words, if you have a 5 acre piece to hunt, you had better stay on it, or bust your balls trying to gain access to hunt every other plot of ground in the neighborhood. This statement is not in specific reference to those city-owned properties cited in the above reference. But, if the folks of Town & Country don't want bowhunting, then they don't want it and are allowed their say regardless of the remifications.

[Warmouth]

landowners just need to apply with the city that they need herd reduction on their property, the cities should have a list of qualified bowhunters to fill the needs of the landowners. i'm all for having a class/registration for individual hunters to make sure they are safe and know the rules of urban hunting. i'm also sure that bowhunters would take it upon themselves to get landowners involved with the program.

urban hunting is happening already, Don, one of my dad's friends shot 10 deer last year in St Loius co. with a crossbow (physical exemption) and told me of how once he had to wipe blood off of the neighbors house because the deer ran too close after being shot. urban hunting won't be perfect, but what the hell is.