Proposal 3 Shot Down!!!

[zr800o1le]

They are Saying Proposal 3 lost by 65%. This Either Means that only 35% of us Hunt and Care, We didn't get the Mesage out Good Enough about it not being just about Doves.
Now What can we Do???? :confused:



They'll take away my Guns and Hunting Rights when they Pry my Cold dead Fingers off the Trigger! :rant:

[poz]

We have divided the hunting community. It use to be that if it was a hunting issue we all stuck together Now hunters are divided. With all the QDM, over shooting does,complaining on the youth hunt,crossbows etc. many hunters that I have talked to basically had the attitude of screw them, I don't hunt doves, so i don't care. this is the wrong attitude to have. but we did it to ourselves. So the next time anyone is out hunting and they see another hunter shoot something legally, yet they don't agree with the method that that hunter used or the size of the animal, if you don't have anything positive to say, then don't say anything. because it may come back to haunt you.

Let this be a wake up call to the future of Hunting in Michigan. And let's learn from our mistakes.

[fasthunter]

They are Saying Proposal 3 lost by 65%. This Either Means that only 35% of us Hunt and Care, We didn't get the Mesage out Good Enough about it not being just about Doves.
Now What can we Do???? :confused:



They'll take away my Guns and Hunting Rights when they Pry my Cold dead Fingers off the Trigger! :rant:
That's pretty sad:( Unfortunately it's a sign that most people our stuck in a world where they can go to the grocery store to buy all of there food and they can't figure out that just maybe some people do eat doves. I eat anything I shoot. Just another thing to ban me and tell me what I can and can't do. I can gripe though, because I did vote and I did get some friends and family to vote on it. I'm pretty upset and I'm sure that the anti's are pretty happy right about now. I can't say much, but it really upsets me that people can't understand that there are people out there that just want to be left alone and live more of an old fashioned life off the land. It's not my fault they have no true clue about how nature works. They might mean well, but they really have no clue about the natural world. Kill or be killed, eat to live, ect.:rant: :rant:

[OSXer]

They are Saying Proposal 3 lost by 65%. This Either Means that only 35% of us Hunt and Care, We didn't get the Mesage out Good Enough about it not being just about Doves.
Now What can we Do???? :confused:

How about giving some sources for such information?
Who is "they" and how do they know?

[OSXer]

How about giving some sources for such information?
Who is "they" and how do they know?
Well **** ... here's a link to the results for anyone whose interested:
http://web.wxyz.com/vote2006/

In a nutshell, I'm plenty pissed at the outcome of prop 3.

I'd like to extend a thanks to the many members of this who put forth good effort on their part. Unfortionately, the effort of sportsmen as a whole to educate and counteract the anti propaganda obviously wasn't enough.

[Barbara]

Myself?

Going to start working on the '08 election. We lost a lot of ground yesterday. We need to get it back.

Maybe go hunting a little, too. :)

[One Eye]

Look at the money spent for and against. It is simple math. SInce most Michigan hunters have never hunted doves, the "fuzzy, bird feeder" syndrome won. I agree on the division within to a point, but I will never follow others blindly simply for the sake of following.

Next steps are easy. Get mobilized for the "sure to come" attack on trapping in 2008. The best defense is a good offense. I would again propose that we start a petition drive to get a Ballot initiative in 2006 that would transfer the power for setting game species and regulations to the DNR, where it belongs. These are the professionals and they shold be deciding what game animals have huntable numbers, not out-of-state special interests.

Thanks to all those who worked hard and to those who got off their butts and voted.

Oh yes, one more thing. We should organize a Michigan Sportsman forum dove hunt across our souther border. After all, those states are obviously more interested in science than emotion!

Dan

[fasthunter]

Look at the money spent for and against. It is simple math. SInce most Michigan hunters have never hunted doves, the "fuzzy, bird feeder" syndrome won. I agree on the division within to a point, but I will never follow others blindly simply for the sake of following.

Next steps are easy. Get mobilized for the "sure to come" attack on trapping in 2008. The best defense is a good offense. I would again propose that we start a petition drive to get a Ballot initiative in 2006 that would transfer the power for setting game species and regulations to the DNR, where it belongs. These are the professionals and they shold be deciding what game animals have huntable numbers, not out-of-state special interests.

Thanks to all those who worked hard and to those who got off their butts and voted.


Oh yes, one more thing. We should organize a Michigan Sportsman forum dove hunt across our souther border. After all, those states are obviously more interested in science than emotion!

Dan Thats a petition that I would sign!

[Barbara]

I'd be cautious about the DNR. Look at some of the past appointees to the NRC.

You want folks who want an environmental impact study on dragging deer making the decisions? At least in the legislature its a long, drawn-out, process to make changes.

[QuakrTrakr]

Shame on everyone who didn't vote. This is almost embarrasing for us hunters.
On a side note, doesn't Remington have a picture of a DOVE on their small game shotshell boxes? :confused:

[Overdew]

I went to Walmart tonight and signed a petition to put a proposal on the ballot to eliminate deer hunting in Michigan.

Good luck to the old ladies who try to drive up to Frankenmuth five years after it is passed. (take it lightly)

Anyway if half the people would have done half the things I did (yes me) it should of had a better chance. But at least I schooled many people about wildlife managment, and I feel that 1% of the yes votes are because of my effort, not bashing anyone but we tried.

[QuakrTrakr]

I went to Walmart tonight and signed a petition to put a proposal on the ballot to eliminate deer hunting in Michigan.

Don't start that! People will take it seriously! I think all the blatent lies in the commercials is what caused the outcome. If we were fighting to keep hunting snakes, or possums, this would have never been an issue. Dove ARE the OFFICIAL LOVE BIRDS THOUGH! What a bunch of crap!

[fasthunter]

Don't start that! People will take it seriously! I think all the blatent lies in the commercials is what caused the outcome. If we were fighting to keep hunting snakes, or possums, this would have never been an issue. Dove ARE the OFFICIAL LOVE BIRDS THOUGH! What a bunch of crap!
Yup!

[Ranger Ray]

Why are we attacking fellow hunters, accusing them of not doing enough? Where is your proof that your fellow hunters didn't do enough? Every hunter I know did their part and voted, had signs in their yards and spread the word. There are more people in this state that don't hunt than do, simple mathematics once prop 3 went to a vote. The percentage of hunters that may have voted against is negligible to the amount of people that don't hunt and voted against it.

[Due51]

Some observations:
2.1 Million people cared enough about wildlife/recreational funds that they voted FOR prop.1
YET
only half those same voters supported a Dove hunt. There's something wrong with that.

The HSUS, PETA, the Fund for Animals have had their champagne. Right now, they're already formulating a plan on the next specie.

Apathy is our enemy. If we don't DO SOMETHING right now, we'll be caught on our heels again and lose another battle.

I hope we all learned that we have to be a little more PRO-active instead of just saying, "I voted for it."

[NEMichsportsman]

I may be wrong in my thinking.....but I have always felt that the compromise Sam Washington made for the limited hunt signed the death warrant for the Dove Hunt. It opened up Pandora’s box as far as anti hunting interests and involvement in MI. Too few hunters were allowed and it was a small geographic area. A statewide hunt would have drawn statewide interest! It kills me to say it but we may have been stronger without any dove hunt at all.

I can't tell you how many hunters I have spoke with that failed to see the linkage between the dove proposal and the future of our hunting rights. Many of these hunters have told me they don’t care about a hunt that only a few landowners by the state line get to participate in.

I applaud all the fine efforts of many individuals here at MS! Unfortunately some life circumstances prevented me from spending as much time fighting for the cause as I would have liked. But with the sad turnout we had yesterday, I see that I will have plenty of opportunity in the future, to fight those battles.

I hope this outcome was a wake-up call to the hundreds of thousands of hunters who did nothing! If it hasn’t-our hunting heritage is doomed.!!!!

[bobcat1963]

For those of you who think that this is the end, you better wake up. This is just the beginning. The antis have won their first battle, albeit be a small skirmish. Dove hunting is allowed in what? 39 states? I never once heard that argument come to light. Anyway, I fear the next item on the agenda will be trapping, because they know most outdoor persons do not trap, so they don't care, and that will come to an end. Pick away at the small stuff, then come at us with everything they've got. Just watch.:mad:

[3006]

In all reality, "they" really didn't take away anything from the state. So, if you did not dove hunt before, you are not going to miss anything. Still not good, but that is the case for most Michigan small game hunters.

On a positive note, we did get them to focus a lot of time and funds in Michigan for aparantly, something Michigan citizens didn't want in the first place. I am sure it took some pressure off of some of the other states that are having some run-ins with granola eating, birkenstock/croc wearing, ultra-fanatical terrorists, oh I mean liberals.

[deputy865]

Yea i was pretty pissed about it to. Wonder what the Anit's are going after next???

Shane

[Ninja]

In all reality, "they" really didn't take away anything from the state. So, if you did not dove hunt before, you are not going to miss anything. Still not good, but that is the case for most Michigan small game hunters.

On a positive note, we did get them to focus a lot of time and funds in Michigan for aparantly, something Michigan citizens didn't want in the first place. I am sure it took some pressure off of some of the other states that are having some run-ins with granola eating, birkenstock/croc wearing, ultra-fanatical terrorists, oh I mean liberals.

We didn't hunt before because we COULDN'T hunt before.

And why exactly did you put forth an effort to get them to shift their focus to our State, and why is it a positive note for you???

[bobcat1963]

The point I'm making here is cohesiveness. It seems that the majority of Michigan hunters only worry about things when it effects their area of the outdoors. I've never hunted a bear or a dove in my life, but I'm going to defend it religiously, because I know a lot of hunters out there do it. The same goes for trapping. I just worry about that lack of cohesiveness. We are all hunters, no matter what game we pursue- that's the bottom line.

[3006]

Dude,

Trying to put some sort of positive spin on something terrible.

As far as focus on Michigan, well, I think there is some political strategy against the antis to have them focus on what should have been a state they could not win in. Hence, the lack of all the Pro Proposal 3 Ad's everyone saw on T.V. and funding by pro-hunting orgs. Apparently that was way wrong.

Still, Michigan is a much stronger sportsman state than some of the others where the antis have been trying to OUTLAW current forms of hunting. In essence, Michigan Sportsman, most likely took a hit, all be it small, that another less fortunate state would have taken.

By the way, I don't even live in Michigan anymore and I worked as hard as I could educating everyone I knew about the benfits of dove hunting. Spent almost 5 hours on the phone calling people to support the proposal the day before the election. Not to mention $$ I sent to support it and the time spent over the course of the past couple years.

[Ninja]

I must have totally misread your post....it sounded like you were saying "no big loss" and also that you had a hand in getting the HSUS to direct their efforts on us instead of your state.

[TankJP]

I would again propose that we start a petition drive to get a Ballot initiative in 2006 that would transfer the power for setting game species and regulations to the DNR, where it belongs. These are the professionals and they shold be deciding what game animals have huntable numbers, not out-of-state special interests.


Didn't this get passed in 2000(?) when the no bait/dogs bear vote was soundly defeated? I was sure there was also a vote for something relating to the DNR having the control and final word on wildlife management and hunting. If I am remembering correctly... how did Prop 3 ever get on the ballot if the DNR has the final word?

[WILDCATWICK]

They'll take away my Guns and Hunting Rights when they Pry my Cold dead Fingers off the Trigger! :rant:


I don't think that the results of that prop = taking guns away. I don't know why fellow sportman take the extream witht that view. Many of my co-workers who voted against dove hunting voted for the prop 1. Showing support for hunters. They are also all for deer hunting and other hunting. They just didn't see the need. I'm not agreeing with their view but they would never vote to take away our guns either. And that is what some of these extream views are claiming. My neighbohr who voted down dove hunting is trying to take my guns away!

"Parnoia self destroya"

[Ninja]

Didn't this get passed in 2000(?) when the no bait/dogs bear vote was soundly defeated? I was sure there was also a vote for something relating to the DNR having the control and final word on wildlife management and hunting. If I am remembering correctly... how did Prop 3 ever get on the ballot if the DNR has the final word?

The NRC would have no say in the matter until the dove's were classified as a "game" bird in the state...until then, the legislature/voters control it.

[Beagle_Dan]

Don't give up. Remember Wisconsin lost their Dove Hunt to the anti's also, and then faught back and ended up winning. Wisconsin now has a dove season. Somehow we need to examine how Wisconsin was able to get back what was taken away.

I feel the lack of TV ads to counter the ads from the anti's is why the proposal was defeated. There was never enough "pro" comments made to persuade any of the confused & undecided citizens. Gibson's radio ad was a good ad, but it should have been on TV. TV ads are what has impact, not the radio alone.

Definitely a sad day.
-Beagle-

[JO_EZ]

The proposal, which was passed in 2000 (I think it was 2000) was proposal G. That same year proposal B was on the ballot.

Prop B attempted to ban bear hunting with dogs and bait. Prop was soundly defeated.

Prop G made it a law that our fish and game management would only be controled by the DNR or NRC based on sound scientific research and not by puplic opinion via ballot proposal. Prop G overwhelmingly passed.

I do not understand how Prop 3 even got on the ballot this year with Prop G was in effect. However, it is my understanding that Prop G should overrule Prop 3, anyway. I do not know what steps should be taken (lawsuits etc) to challange prop 3, but I think we have legal grounds to do something.

Does anyone else have more insight into Prop G and how it fits in here?

[Ninja]

The proposal, which was passed in 2000 (I think it was 2000) was proposal G. That same year proposal B was on the ballot.

Prop B attempted to ban bear hunting with dogs and bait. Prop was soundly defeated.

Prop G made it a law that our fish and game management would only be controled by the DNR or NRC based on sound scientific research and not by puplic opinion via ballot proposal. Prop G overwhelmingly passed.

I do not understand how Prop 3 even got on the ballot this year with Prop G was in effect. However, it is my understanding that Prop G should overrule Prop 3, anyway. I do not know what steps should be taken (lawsuits etc) to challange prop 3, but I think we have legal grounds to do something.

Does anyone else have more insight into Prop G and how it fits in here?


Prop G would not apply until our Legislature classifies an animal as "game".
The mourning dove is not classified a "game bird" due to the defeat of prop 3.

[part timer]

The proposal, which was passed in 2000 (I think it was 2000) was proposal G. That same year proposal B was on the ballot.

Prop B attempted to ban bear hunting with dogs and bait. Prop was soundly defeated.

Prop G made it a law that our fish and game management would only be controled by the DNR or NRC based on sound scientific research and not by puplic opinion via ballot proposal. Prop G overwhelmingly passed.

I do not understand how Prop 3 even got on the ballot this year with Prop G was in effect. However, it is my understanding that Prop G should overrule Prop 3, anyway. I do not know what steps should be taken (lawsuits etc) to challange prop 3, but I think we have legal grounds to do something.

Does anyone else have more insight into Prop G and how it fits in here?

Proposal G established that the DNR would have responsibility for establishing seasons and bag limits for game animals. Note that it doesn't give them authority for determining what species are game animals.

The Dove wasn't designated a game animal until the legislation was signed in August, 2004. When the signatures were certified to have a referendum the legislation was suspended per the Michigan Constitution. Sadly the legislation was just overturned at the ballot and the mourning dove is officially a song bird in the state of Michigan. Therefore, Proposal G does not apply.

[brdhntr]

I don't think that the results of that prop = taking guns away. I don't know why fellow sportman take the extream witht that view. Many of my co-workers who voted against dove hunting voted for the prop 1. Showing support for hunters. They are also all for deer hunting and other hunting. They just didn't see the need. I'm not agreeing with their view but they would never vote to take away our guns either. And that is what some of these extream views are claiming. My neighbohr who voted down dove hunting is trying to take my guns away!

"Parnoia self destroya"

And the anti's will be back with more seasons that we don't "need" and each time we lose, we lose a few more votes for the next in line. It has happened in other states, it will happen here. There is no "need" to hunt any species of animal in the US. No they aren't going to take deer hunting tomorrow, but each year we get the apathy that our hunters have for other's pursuits, we lose ground to the anti's. It will take time, but they will get it.

Also, for those who say we lost an opportunity we never had, that is wrong. We did have a season in 2004, and it was successful. We lost that season, yesterday.

[Shlwego]

Perhaps now that we've suffered a defeat at the polls, it's time to look at the larger picture. There were "hunters" who voted against dove hunting, and that's unfortunate and it angers me. But it's in the past now. What we need now is an initiative that will bring all hunters back together, and it's not going to be trapping, believe me!
What we need is an ammendment to the State Constitution guaranteeing a "Right to Hunt." Currently in Michigan, hunting is just a "priveledge," and as such it can be taken away. Many other states have guaranteed hunting as "Right" that cannot be taken away.
If we don't protect hunting as a right, it will be slowly picked away at until we lose it all. The anti's have proven in this dove fight that they have WAY MORE MONEY available to spend on advertising than the pro-hunting side does. They were able to tell outright lies ("doves are used as target practice" "too small to eat") and we didn't have the funding to challenge them. They can do the same thing again, and they will, with trapping, and then bow-hunting, and then, and then, and then.... and they will STILL have more money than they can spend left over.
If we word the ballot language correctly, then we can TAKE IT ALL off the table, by guaranteeing a "Right to Hunt, Trap, and Fish" all game species, by all currently acceptable methods (i.e. bow, dogs, firearms, trapping, etc.). The anti's would scream and howl over this, to be sure, but since it would effect ALL hunters and fishermen, we'd probably be able to stick together and get it passed.

Just my $0.02

[gmalicoat]

it is almost noon--is everyone hiding under their beds? have they come for your guns yet? is deer season cancelled?

[Ninja]

Proposal G established that the DNR would have responsibility for establishing seasons and bag limits for game animals. Note that it doesn't give them authority for determining what species are game animals.

The Dove wasn't designated a game animal until the legislation was signed in August, 2004. When the signatures were certified to have a referendum the legislation was suspended per the Michigan Constitution. Sadly the legislation was just overturned at the ballot and the mourning dove is officially a song bird in the state of Michigan. Therefore, Proposal G does not apply.

Linda,
With all due respect, the mourning dove isn't classified as a songbird....never has been.
Even the Audobon Society doesn't classify it as such.

[JO_EZ]

Oh. Dang.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Ninja]

it is almost noon--is everyone hiding under their beds? have they come for your guns yet? is deer season cancelled?

Can they hunt mountain lions in California?
Can they trap in California, Washington, or Oregon?


Why can't you see what is on their agenda? It is written in plain english on their website....the writing is on the wall...trapping will be next, along with tournament fishing...and then...???

[WILDCATWICK]

It has happened in other states, it will happen here.

OK. Thanks for clearing that up:rolleyes:

Can they hunt mountain lions in California?

Can we hunt owls? Can we hunt wood peckers? Nope. I guesse the Antis are winning.:tdo12:

Here's a few points. The ballot was to allow hunting of doves not take it away. If it would have been the other way around you may have seen it work.

The other fact is PETA and other anti organizations did not vote. They petitioned it on to the ballot and that it. Your and my neighbohr vote and we did a terrible job of informing them. Most of them did not vote against it with the thought of "ahhh and next we can take my neighbohrs gun". You guys that are arguing that are just way off IMO.

Your 100% right that anti groups want to take our guns away. Duh! But to say my neighbohrs that voted to not start a season on doves was done because they have an underlying agenda is wrong. There is no correlation for the majority.

[Ninja]

OK. Thanks for clearing that up:rolleyes:



Can we hunt owls? Can we hunt wood peckers? Nope. I guesse the Antis are winning.:tdo12:


They WERE allowed to hunt lions in California...it was taken away.
They were allowed to trap in the other states....it was taken away.
WE were allowed to hunt doves....it was taken away.

[WILDCATWICK]

WE were allowed to hunt doves....it was taken away.

Ummm. That's not how the proposal read and that was part of my point. The proposal read to allow Dove Hunting. Which as of last time I checked was not allowed in Michigan at the time of voting. It was an experimental temporary season that prior, but not currently. Your wrong.

[RichP]

Ummm. That's not how the proposal read and that was part of my point. The proposal read to allow Dove Hunting. Which as of last time I checked was not allowed in Michigan at the time of voting. It was an experimental temporary season that prior, but not currently. Your wrong.

Ninja is correct, you're splitting hairs. At the time the ballot proposal was first bandied about, dove hunting was allowed, the injunction was directly related to the ballot proposal. So yes, it was taken away.

[Ninja]

Ummm. That's not how the proposal read and that was part of my point. The proposal read to allow Dove Hunting. Which as of last time I checked was not allowed in Michigan at the time of voting. It was an experimental temporary season that prior, but not currently. Your wrong.

Let me expand....we were allowed to hunt doves through the limtied experimental season. Based on the findings from that, the NRC was going to decide if there should be a full season.
Due to the referendum, they will not have the chance....hence, it was taken away.

[WILDCATWICK]

Why don't you ask someone who votes no. If they thought they were voting to take away a season we already had versu adding another hunting species and season. I guarantee you the way the ballot read and the history of how it came on to the ballot that they will tell ya the voted to not add a new season. It's perception. We lost because we didn't want to educate and organize. Our own loss really. You can call it splitting hairs but the way I explained it is how the ballot read and you can't deny that (although your trying hard).

Let's beat the a their own game and try to get something else added on or an extended season by starting our own signiture drive for a proposal in 08'. That way the anti's will have to combat that instead of trying to take something else away (if that's how you want to view it). We sound like a bunch of winey cry babies. Do something. Start something. They didn't win anything, we lost because we didn't do a damn thing.

[Nick Adams]

We are all hunters, no matter what game we pursue- that's the bottom line.

You need to ask yourself whether:

a) We hunt as a means of managing wildlife (i.e. wildlife management is the bottom line) or

b) We manage wildlife in order to have something to hunt (i.e. recreational sport hunting is the bottom line)

If the latter is more important to you than the former, the anti-hunters are going to beat you like a gong every time, given the percentage of the state population that are non-hunters.

If you want to gain traction with the general population your are going to have to pay more attention to the wildlife management aspect of hunting, not to the 'my right to hunt and kill things' aspect of it. The dove hunt referendum failed because the general population perceived it as being all about a bunch of yahoos with guns looking for something else to kill for recreation and having little or nothing to do with wildlife managment. Look at the comments on this thread alone. You guys made it easy for them.

-na

[tdduckman]

You need to ask yourself whether:

a) We hunt as a means of managing wildlife (i.e. wildlife management is the bottom line) or

b) We manage wildlife in order to have something to hunt (i.e. recreational sport hunting is the bottom line)

If the latter is more important to you than the former, the anti-hunters are going to beat you like a gong every time, given the percentage of the state population that are non-hunters.

If you want to gain traction with the general population your are going to have to pay more attention to the wildlife management aspect of hunting, not to the 'my right to hunt and kill things' aspect of it. The dove hunt referendum failed because the general population perceived it as being all about a bunch of yahoos with guns looking for something else to kill for recreation and having little or nothing to do with wildlife managment. Look at the comments on this thread alone. You guys made it easy for them.

-na



Nick


Please list the species of animals currently hunted in Michigan that require management via hunting.


Thanks

[Sam22]

Awwweee F**K. The conversation on this thread is pretty right on. IMHO... The state should see the Dove as it sees all the other game animals in it, a managable resource, resulting in revenue. Maybe we have seen too many Disney movies? Why not make money of these little buggers?? There is no way they will be allowed to be hunted down to dangerously low levels. I think it's time we remember the role of legislation, and remove the morality and fluffyness from the resource, it doesn't exist. Assuming that it does is fuel for the anti's and all sorts of other bad ideas.

Please list the species of animals currently hunted in Michigan that require management via hunting.
Dude... ALL OF THEM, deer, grouse, turkeyes, elk and phesants are all managed fairly extensively, not to mention all waterfowl.... What do you think NWR's SGA's Wildlife Floodings, DNR feeding and planting problems, habitat creation by cutting, what do you think all that is?? Bag limits, harvest surveys, banding, radio collaring.. it's all management. Deer, Geese, and Elk (argueably others as well) need to be culled, and hunting is the #1 tool of the state management agencies

[QuakrTrakr]

Nick


Please list the species of animals currently hunted in Michigan that require management via hunting.


Thanks
Nick- It's BOTH.
Aren't all GAME species managed via hunting?

[tdduckman]

Dude... ALL OF THEM, deer, grouse, turkeyes, elk and phesants are all managed fairly extensively, not to mention all waterfowl.... What do you think NWR's SGA's Wildlife Floodings, DNR feeding and planting problems, habitat creation by cutting, what do you think all that is?? Bag limits, harvest surveys, banding, radio collaring.. it's all management. Deer, Geese, and Elk (argueably others as well) need to be culled, and hunting is the #1 tool of the state management agencies

REQUIRE MANAGEMENT


See this is where people get it wrong if we have to prove that the species needs to be hunted we are doomed.


All of that work benifits wildlife and hunting but ducks do not NEED hunters

They are not over populated and have plenty of other preditors



Look if we base hunting on the REQUIRED management, the only thing the non-hunting public will allow us to hunt is deer that eat thier bushes in thier yards.



Most wildlife we hunt is hunted sustainably but does not REQUIRE hunting.


Grouse- no hunting needed (they have hawks) Pheasants, quail (we have a quail season in michigan and how many hunters have even seen one) and other wildfowl do not require hunting to keep them in balance.




Deer and Geese--- There you go boys thats whats left to hunt if we only hunt those animals that require hunting... (well not geese you can oil thier eggs much more humane)



Fight or lose
TD

[QuakrTrakr]

TD- Where will you get the funds to manage deer? TURKEY? DUCKS?
Ducks are regulated by the Federal Government. Not Michigan.
What would happen to a RECREATIONAL State? If you stop hunting, restuaraunts, hotels, store owners, gas stations, etc, etc,etc, would lose money. When even the governor realizes recreation is a HUGE part of this economy, hunting and fishing are THE biggest part of that. Ohio gets millions of dollars from Michigan dove hunters. Wouldn't it be nice to keep that money in our economy?

[Nick Adams]

Nick- It's BOTH.

It may be BOTH to you and to me, but it's not BOTH to the non-hunters in this state.

-na

[TNL]

Is that we learn from this.

We learn to take these types of proposals as a serious threat to our way of life.
We learn to unite and speak under one voice.
We learn to give the lead to an experienced political organization like MUCC, of which all it's members are sportsmen/women.
We learn to start earlier.
We learn that people sometimes make decisions on emotions--and we can use that to our advantage.
We learn to also use rational arguements to counter the anti ads. Becky Humphries did an excellent job on MOOD, only not enough voters saw it.
We learn to use TV as our main from of advertising.
We learn to use celebrities as spokesmen.
We learn how to raise money.
We learn how to target market our advertising to the general public.
We learn to network. If every licensed hunter in Michigan could get 3 people to "see the light", prop. 3 would have passed.

And finally, we learn not to let this happen again.

[QuakrTrakr]

It may be BOTH to you and to me, but it's not BOTH to the non-hunters in this state.

-na
You're right. But I think it boiled down to wrongly protrayed commercials. WHICH, boiled down to money. HSUS has more members than the NRA. They aren't going away, there're gonna keep doing this. They have alot of press, movie stars, left wing liberals, and tree huggers giving money to their cause. Most hunters don't have that kind of money to try to defend our cause. Most hunters I know, have just enough money to support their family, household, and hunting/fishing hobby. If we could stage a huge campaign like they did, we'd have a chance. All I heard was the Gibby commercial.

[tdduckman]

My point is this

I love hunting, I campaigned hard for prop 3

but if you do what Nick suggests and use the same litmus test on mnay of our game species as was done for Doves we lose.

Many species can be hunted without any impact to them pheasants, grouse, quail.....


But hunting is not REQUIRED for them to exist, we simply harvest the excess, just like dove hunting in other states....



Sure there is an economic benifit but that is not what Nick said he stated that we should focus on those thate require management.



If we stop hunting pheasants will the population crash??? - no

but then I wouldn't be able to run my dog and have fun --

so with Nicks theroy I better take up management doe hunting, something I can defend.


TD

[garyb]

They WERE allowed to hunt lions in California...it was taken away.
They were allowed to trap in the other states....it was taken away.
WE were allowed to hunt doves....it was taken away.
i think the odds were against us...alot of bird watchers out there, alot of the elderly in nursing homes , i don't think it is all the anti s plain just alot of bird lovers out there their not like bears or wolves who people fear just a little bird i do understand that there is people out there that do enjoy to eat them and shoot them ,maybe in some way we will be able to win next time and i am sure there will be...........p.s. i did vote ''yes''

[Sam22]

"Require management" I guess require for what right? basically none of our wildlife requires hunting to maintain a population. It requires managment to optimize the resource basically. If whitetails were not ever hunted.. eventually numbers would drop due to starvation.. below where they are now, but they are in no danger of extinction from lack of hunting.

[Lucky Chuck]

trapping will be next,the antis will be like why do you need to trap now? there isnt a fur trade anymore? and most non hunting people will be like ya this is the 21st century why DO you need to trap?

[tdduckman]

So if we approach hunting based on what can be taken without damaging a population, or what is sustainable then we can agree that all michigan game are "managed"



What I as a hunter see as reasonble to hunt is different then a non-hunter, they don't see a need to hunt anything or they would hunt.

[QuakrTrakr]

Not to change the subject, but here's what we won't know.
http://www.backwoodsbound.com/zdove.html

[One Eye]

Here's a few points. The ballot was to allow hunting of doves not take it away. If it would have been the other way around you may have seen it work.
In reality, Michigan DID have a dove season already and it was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Gov! So, this vote did take away the dove season. So, yes we lost a leglislated hunting season!

Stay tuned, as the same tactics utilized by the antis on this issue will be brought to bear on there next target, TRAPPING!

Dan

[tdduckman]

If you believe you can rationalize with these people please read


The vast majority of species that are hunted—waterfowl, upland birds, mourning doves, squirrels, raccoons, rabbits, crows, coyotes, etc.—provide minimal sustenance and do not require population control." – HSUS Website 2003.

Duck hunters often exceed their bag limits or kill protected species because most hunters cannot identify the species of duck that they shoot." – HSUS Website 2003.


Waterfowl, pheasant and dove hunting are no more than shooting at living targets." – HSUS Website 2003


"The pheasant hunt has…developed into a pathetic blend of factory farming and canned hunting…the "sport" is non-existent…makes a mockery of ethical field conduct." – HSUS Website 2003.







There once was a time when most Americans needed to hunt to put food on the table, but hunting today is a recreational pastime, and worse: waterfowl, pheasant, and dove hunting are no more than shooting at living targets. Some hunting is done solely to acquire trophies or to see who can kill the most; some is no more than shooting tame, confined animals. Brutally inhumane weapons such as the bow and arrow are increasingly used. In all cases, sport hunting inflicts undeniable cruelty—pain, trauma, wounding, and death—on living, sentient creatures. The Humane Society of the United States believes that causing suffering and death is by definition inhumane, regardless of method. More than 100 million animals are reported killed by hunters each year. That number does not include the millions of animals for which kill figures are not maintained by state wildlife agencies.
The vast majority of species that are hunted—waterfowl, upland birds, mourning doves, squirrels, raccoons, rabbits, crows, coyotes, etc.—provide minimal sustenance and do not require population control.
Hunters have strived for decades to convince the American public that hunting is good for wildlife and good for society, often with arguments that are based on obfuscation and half-truths. They have deliberately focused the debate on deer hunting, for which plausible, but not necessarily true, arguments for subsistence and management can be made. But the holes in their arguments are becoming increasingly apparent, as is the magnitude of their waste, cruelty and destruction. More than that, sport hunting—the killing of wild animals as recreation—is fundamentally at odds with the values of a humane, just and caring society. HSUS website 2006

[Nick Adams]

this is the 21st century why DO you need to trap?

I understand that this was a rhetorical question, nevertheless, it is a good question.

These are things you need to start thinking about sooner rather than later. Put some time into crafting a reply to this question without once using a personal pronoun, because when it comes right down to it the average suburbanite isn't going care about you and what they percieve to be your sick little hobby of killing wild animals for fun.

When you get done you'll have something effective to use to convince non-hunters why recreational trapping is a good idea, even in the 21st century.

-na

[QuakrTrakr]

HSUS doesn't use facts. We are trying to fight an unfair fight. They use adjectives like "cruel" "inhumane" "unnecisary" "brutally" "pathetic". They play to emotion, not facts. Unfortunately, that's what extremists do.

[Ferris_StateHunter]

Sad sad Day.... Nothing more to be said, The Antis' Yes ANTI's won! I like many on here wonder where the brotherhood of hunting went? The pictures you see of old time hunting camps with many deer or various games hanging on the poles with a group of guys who are passionate about HUNTING... I may have not been a avid dove hunter, but listening to people I would have loved to make a few trips down to the border to hunt these seemingly hard birds... and Yes eat them to! I hope we as HUNTERS can come together the next time (more than likely trapping) to band against these idiots who care nothing about anyone but themselves, but of course are first to complain to the insurance company and file their claim when a deer or animal wrecks their car, I just hope we can all unite no matter what the species, if we will hunt them or not it just needs to be done:grouphug:

[part timer]

... I hope we as HUNTERS can come together the next time (more than likely trapping) to band against these idiots who care nothing about anyone but themselves..

A key rule of engagement is to never underestimate your adversary. Make no mistake about it - the HSUS people are very smart and very well organized. They most certainly are not self-centered idiots. There was a front-page article on Wayne Pacelle and HSUS's lobbying efforts. He was presented as a savvy and committed protector of animals.

[Lucky Chuck]

Name me one hunter that doesnt love the outdoors and respect the wildlife? name me one hunter who thinks hunting is more about killing animals then just being outdoors a part of this wonderful thing we call nature.Name me one hunter who just takes a gun into the woods and just starts blasting away killing everything in his path while laughing and throwing candy bar wrappers on the ground.Those ignorant antis are like that crazy old women with a hundred cats that she cant possibly take care of but insists she loves animals all the while they are flea ridden and starving :rolleyes:

[bawplank]

I heard that a the group had said they will go after tourament fishing next? Can anyone confirm this. The reason I ask is because I want to make sure its true because I almost went off on a bait shop owner when he said it didnt affect him and he voted no. He said he heard people only shoot them for target practice anyway. Id like see where the gruop said that so I can show this guy how stupid he is. I wonder if all his customers know he voted agaisnt sportsman.

[Ferris_StateHunter]

A key rule of engagement is to never underestimate your adversary. Make no mistake about it - the HSUS people are very smart and very well organized. They most certainly are not self-centered idiots. There was a front-page article on Wayne Pacelle and HSUS's lobbying efforts. He was presented as a savvy and committed protector of animals.

Not underestimating their intelligence, only meaning idiots as to their "ideals" as to what is right and what is wrong...

[TankJP]

In reality, Michigan DID have a dove season already and it was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Gov! So, this vote did take away the dove season. So, yes we lost a leglislated hunting season!

Stay tuned, as the same tactics utilized by the antis on this issue will be brought to bear on there next target, TRAPPING!

Dan

I heard the Govenor on WMMQ here in Lansing this morning. She was asked if she was going to support Prop 3. She said yes and that she already had an agreement with the DNR/NRC to establish the 'test' season in the bottom 7 counties in the state. This was what was already passed and signed and was supposed to come to be until Prop 3 took place.

I was shocked to hear her be so pro-hunting and supportive of this (even though I know she did sign it earlier).

[WILDCATWICK]

In reality, Michigan DID have a dove season already and it was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Gov! So, this vote did take away the dove season. So, yes we lost a leglislated hunting season!

Stay tuned, as the same tactics utilized by the antis on this issue will be brought to bear on there next target, TRAPPING!

Dan


Holy wah! Get it thru your heads. The ballot listed it as..... Not that we have it and may or may not take it away. :banghead3

Anyway that was a temporary season. Not permant so no we didn't have it. But that not my point. My point is the way the ballot was worded.

[milmo1]

Any outdoorsmen and women who are not freightened by last night's results has no idea what we are up against. The general public is ignorant. They voted based on emotion. It can and will beat us again, unless we take steps, now. Someone mentioned a bill protecting the RIGHT to hunt and fish within Michigan. This would may be a very wise first step.

[Gunslingergirl]

I've been following this thread most of the day, and just had to throw in my two cents.

I'm in Marketing and have been in television and PR. What the pro dove hunting crowd lacked in this campaign was a coherent message. Grassroots organizing, which a lot of people on this forum did, is great, but it can't combat television ads and a coordinated media campaign. That's just the reality of how the world operates today.

I'm amazed that I didn't see any pro dove hunting commericals. I didn't see any literature in my mailbox. The hunting organizations didn't send out any e-mails or newsletters until Monday, and those were pretty much already preaching to the converted.

A study done recently said that 78% of the population in the United States approved of hunting. They may approve, but a lot of them don't hunt and don't know much about it. Approval also doesn't necessarily translate into understanding or activism. Those people are the ones that need to be reached, and it needs to be done in a coordinated manner.

Part of the problem is the anti-hunting organizations are very media savvy. They understand the media and how to use it. The television commercials they used to promote their anti dove hunting agenda in Michigan were crap, but they got the message out.

If the hunting community is going to gain territory instead of losing it, everyone needs to understand the media and how to use it. If the hunting community doesn't have a coherent message and a unified way to present it so that it can reach the most people possible, there will be other defeats.

That's just my two cents.

[wally-eye]

Where the hell is the outrage against Gov. Granholm. Its entirely her fault that the dove bill was on the ballot to begin with. If she would have signed the bill that was presented to her "without" adding the caveat that it be placed on the ballot there would not be this consternation.

Gov. Granholm is not a friend of sportsmen.

WHERES THE OUTRAGE. If you voted for her you voted to ban dove hunting............................:rant:

Its really pretty simple.

[tdduckman]

You can't buy TV ads without it

To those who ask where they were I hope you pony'ed up cash


The sportsmen let themselves down.



When the swepstakes failed (thankyou MUCC)


Then we had to raise cash fast and few stepped up.



Just the facts I could gave more, but I would say 1% of the sportsmen carried the load on this one.

[part timer]

Where the hell is the outrage against Gov. Granholm. Its entirely her fault that the dove bill was on the ballot to begin with. If she would have signed the bill that was presented to her "without" adding the caveat that it be placed on the ballot there would not be this consternation.

Gov. Granholm is not a friend of sportsmen.

WHERES THE OUTRAGE. If you voted for her you voted to ban dove hunting............................:rant:

Its really pretty simple.

Wall-eye,

You are misinformed. There was no such stipulation by Granholm. She cannot create legislation - she can approve or veto legislation brought forward by the House and Senate. The referendum process used to challeange this bill is part of the Michigan Constitution and can be used with most new legislation. You may not agree with Granholm's policies but she is not responsible for the referendum.

[gmalicoat]

Thanks part--saves me the trouble.

[wally-eye]

Defend her if you wish............:rant: But she did sign the legislation with the referendum that it be presented on the ballot, she did NOT have to do this.............should have signed it the way it was presented instead of taking money from the antis for her re-election.

[StumpJumper]

Defend her if you wish............:rant:

Yeah Devos would've been so much better...Guess you didn't pay much attention to who he supports.:rolleyes:

[wally-eye]

Didn't vote for him either..............

[hounder]

There were some groups that ponied up some fairly serious $$$ to fight the anti-crowd. To the best of my knowledge MBHA and MHDF were the only state orgs other then MUCC to shell out $15K to be part of the steering committee for CWC. A lot of energy was expended by a lot of members of all 3 orgs to promote the sweepstakes. The anti's one-up'd us on that one and as I understand it that money got tied up. This had to leave the effort woefully short on funds. I know a lot of other orgs did contribute and I do not mean to make lite those contributions. But I also wonder where the large groups were/are? Surely if MBHA and MHDF could muster the funds to support the cause other larger clubs had the resources...

In short it was a matter of priorities and the priority evidently was not to support this group of sportsman.

[part timer]

Defend her if you wish............:rant: But she did sign the legislation with the referendum that it be presented on the ballot, she did NOT have to do this.............should have signed it the way it was presented instead of taking money from the antis for her re-election.

A point of clarification: I don't see any defence of Granholm or her political perspectives. However, your posts are misinforming others, by claiming she had a 'referendum rider' on the original bill. The referendum process is a part of the Michigan Constitution and can be brought into play on most new legislation. The governor has no say in which legislation can or cannot be put on the ballot by referendum.

Granholm may have influenced the Senate to send her a bill without an appropriation - but the Senate had to pass the bill. Note: A bill with an appropriation is not subject to a referendum.

It just seems to me that getting worked up on Granholm's role is wasted and ill focused energy.

[walleyeman2006]

this plain sucks....and those of you that think this isnt an anti hunting issue all together are mistaken peta and the other terrorist groups like elf and alf will never stop we have only one thing going for us in michigan and being a former insurance agent id say

deer hunting is the safest of the bunch because insurance companys couldnt afford to see a stop to hunting crop damage and auto damage would break them...and they have more money then god so they will make sure it never happens..but then you cant trust large corporations either.........there was a lawsuit in the works against the dnr for missmanagement of the deer heard a few years back and then all of the sudden there were over the counter doe permits and left overs and correct me if im wrong but the lawsuit went away
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''''''''''''''''
But bird hunting took a serious hit but it has taken a few bad ones in the past allso

remember when trapping paid? racoons and fox were there but not like they are now

ive raised and released around a 1000 pheasants over the years at one point over 100 coons were shot and trapped near our pen in less then a year...we lost 50 birds in one night it made me sick..we called around looken for a coon hunter and no locals even bothered any more

Prop 1 passed by a big margin that means many hunters and fisherman voted against dove hunting plain and simple.

we need to make sure this doesnt happen again and need to start right now


lock your kids play station in the closet and take em hunting !!!!