Iowa Water Fowlers Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,676 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Dear fellow MOVWA Members & Friends​

It is a matter of extreme urgency that each of us contact every last one of the NRC members in support of having an Iowa Dove season this 2011. Please read the details below and pass this information onto your friends and family members asking them to help in support of an Iowa Dove Hunting season.​

If you want a Dove season now is the time for action.
This was forwarded to me.
My understanding is the folks against a dove season are bombarding the Natural Resources Commission, and that Ms. Garst (who opposes a season) wants to bring this to a vote before she leaves. The anti’s have the lead at this point in communications with the NRC. I’d suggest that we all contact our memberships and ask them to email the NRC in support of the dove season……………and ask that they engage their friends and associates to do the same thing. A simple message is all that is neededâ€"“I support a dove season in Iowa. Please move quickly to accomplish the steps necessary to set the framework for and to hold a mourning dove season in Iowa in Fall, 2011.” Here is the email list for the standing commission at this timeâ€"​

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO ALL DOVE SEASON SUPPORTORS THAT YOU KNOW, ASK THAT THEY EMAIL ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
Gregory Drees​

Commission Chairman​


Richard (Kim) Francisco​

Commission secretary​


Tammi Kircher​

Commission vice chairwoman​


(Term expires in April)​

Dennis Schemmel​


Margo Underwood​


Elizabeth Garst​


(Term expires in April)​

Janelle Rettig​


The number of e-mails to the commissioners was as high as 5 to 1 against last week, the blatant anti dove articles in the Register and other media outlets spurred the antis to action. They're not happy about the way it went through the legislature so fast, I've heard they spent $100K in the week before it passed and Iowans against dove hunting just hired 2 lobbyists on the Tuesday it passed the Senate so they're probably a little irritated!​

We turned the tide the last couple days as the first calls went out to contact the Commissioners, we need to continue it right through the meeting. (and remember this is just the notice of the rules, final rules are a couple months away, yet another chance for the antis.)​

It's important the governor appoint people to the Natural resources commission who are level headed real outdoors people and this action is why the MO VALLEY WATERFOWLERS ASSOCIATION will seek efforts to establish a state Migratory NRC that specifically deals with Migratory hunting issues and require that all members who serve on this Commission have a valid Iowa Migratory bird hunting license history and throughout their entire term as a member of the state Migratory Natural Resource Commission.​

Sincerely,
William J. Smith​

Pass this along folks, lets make them earn their money!​
 

·
Man without a Plan
Joined
·
1,517 Posts
Anti-hunters and Dovers are going to keep this state from recovering a small portion of the hunters dollars that have been lost over the last 15 years.

Although I would love to see this in a general public vote and they lose. Although I doubt they lose in a public vote to many yuppies in Iowa cities any more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
Although I doubt they lose in a public vote to many yuppies in Iowa cities any more.
That's not the issue. The problem is, they're the only ones that will act. Most hunters aren't very proactive. Most will talk about supporting it, not make any phone calls, then when it gets reversed, will bitch about the politics behind it or complain about the NRC commission.

If hunters would get ahead of it and actually make the phone calls and send the emails, we'd blow the anti's out of the water. But judging from past actions, it won't happen. So, either make the contacts with the NRC or sit back and hope the anti's can't/won't/don't sway the commission.
 

·
Dakota Cyclone
Joined
·
1,419 Posts
That's not the issue. The problem is, they're the only ones that will act. Most hunters aren't very proactive. Most will talk about supporting it, not make any phone calls, then when it gets reversed, will bitch about the politics behind it or complain about the NRC commission.

If hunters would get ahead of it and actually make the phone calls and send the emails, we'd blow the anti's out of the water. But judging from past actions, it won't happen. So, either make the contacts with the NRC or sit back and hope the anti's can't/won't/don't sway the commission.
I think it is pathetic the comments that I read in the Des Moines Register stating that hunters are going to be shooting doves off of bird feeders. This is the general public that walks among us. The future is not too bright for this world with dip shits like that out there. Of course we won't be able to hunt within city limits and you still will need to be 200 yards from a house. As a buddy of mine says "No wonder the Japs are so far ahead".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Here is the response I got from one of my emails:


Thanks for your email regarding the dove issue. I will stand strong to establish hunting season for mourning doves in Iowa. I would expect, but cannot guarantee, the issue to pass with a majority vote of the Natural Resource Commission, paving the way for Iowa’s first-ever season this fall.
Thanks for your interest and support.


Greg Drees
Chair, NRC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,676 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
This was forwarded to me.

What part of that did you miss?​

The name issue at the end was placed at the bottom when sent to e mail list. I just took what I had sent and posted it as is. However I do have to go to the start of the topic text:​

This was forwarded to me.

Bill, I don't mind you reposting Jim's and my words but signing it with your name at the end is a bit much.
If you don't mind then could you please explain the last 4 words please? Really Jr thats the problem we face here? Personally I think the energy you put into the comment would have been better served elsewhere don't you think?

Good God Man!
 

·
Pelican
Joined
·
5,482 Posts
I'm confused........this was a bill right? the last man it had to go to was the govenor, he signed his name....... we have a dove season. How in the hell is the antis going to the NRC going to reverse this?
 

·
Man without a Plan
Joined
·
1,517 Posts
Because the NRC is the public voice in the DNR. Not saying they would reverse it but they could tell the DNR it is a bad idea from the general population stand point.
 

·
Pelican
Joined
·
5,482 Posts
Well the biggest dang argument for the dove season was for all the money it was gonna bring in. Tell me this wouldn't be buisness suicide. Thats like saying "Ah I'm gonna turn away hundreds of thousands of dollars cause part of the general population doesn't want me to". Either way I'm still neutral.
 

·
Huntress
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
Who spent $100k against this -- and which lobbyists where hired??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
Prarie, that part of the post was originally written by me, the 100K I'm told was spent went mostly to lobbyists.

From the lobbyist declarations against SF464:

Amber Markham
Iowans Against Dove Hunting client added on March 22, 2011

Jennifer Kingland
Animal Rescue League of IA client added on March 21, 2011

Kimberly Haus (this would look to be the "regular" lobbyist for these 2 groups)
Animal Rescue League of IA IA. Federation of Humane Societies

Susan Cameron
Animal Rescue League of IA client added on March 21, 2011
 

·
Huntress
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
Thanks JC, thats what I was wondering. Seems weird for the ARL to get involved.

I just saw that the Iowans Against Dove Hunting website has pretty white pet dove pictures all over. Seems like for 100k you could do some research and get the right species at least. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
I just saw that the Iowans Against Dove Hunting website has pretty white pet dove pictures all over. Seems like for 100k you could do some research and get the right species at least. :rolleyes:
If they were concerned with facts and/or accuracy, they probably would have. Since most liberal arguments are based off of emotion and appearance (RARELY facts), I don't think they give a shit one way or the other.
 

·
Huntress
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
If they were concerned with facts and/or accuracy, they probably would have. Since most liberal arguments are based off of emotion and appearance (RARELY facts), I don't think they give a shit one way or the other.
You could say the same thing about conservatives -- there are emotional people who don't do their research on both sides. And there are stupid people everywhere. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,439 Posts
Bill, I don't mind you reposting Jim's and my words but signing it with your name at the end is a bit much.
Huh very interesting.......................................... Bill any remarks???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
You could say the same thing about conservatives -- there are emotional people who don't do their research on both sides. And there are stupid people everywhere. ;)
I don't disagree with you, but if you listened to the house debate of the bill you would have heard at least four different dems vote no (and I only listened for 20 minutes)...with their primary reason being they "saw no reason to kill cute little doves." You generally don't see conservative reps citing the desirable (our undesirable) appearance of something determining their vote. Generally they will have some sort of fact to back up their decision...even if it is incorrect at times.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top