|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 12, 2012 20:34:03 GMT -6
ADC we have a lot of experts. Some are Directors who have been through past battles and are experts in thier own right. Also we have DNR people who are also trappers who know a lot more than the average bear about trapping, DNR, and the Legislature and the relationship between them. Someone help me out here does ITA have a lobbyist AND a Legislative liason person or just a lobbyist?
Those experts do not get to decide what happens, they only offer suggestions to guys like me and you. We have to decide if we want to listen to them or not. If we don't listen to them why have them?
Nothing is stopping you ADC or others like ADC, from starting the ball rolling. Find yourself a legislator and go for it. You do not need an expert nor ITA to do this.
The problem is some of you think common sense will prevail if you get this ball rolling. That's often not the case in political environments.
I perked up big time at the meeting when the discussion switched to trap tags and changing the code. Especially when Jason said he thought the tags may be a stand alone section. But when he got his code book out I saw all that was at stake.
So, do you guys want to gamble losing on your road ditches, and basically everything that is listed in that code section? That is what you would be doing.
I have seen guys who get into trouble hire a good expert lawyer, then ignore that lawyer's advice because they do not like what they are hearing. Those guys usually lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by iowatrapper on Sept 12, 2012 21:00:43 GMT -6
Personally, by the looks of it I would rather not mess with that section of the code. Call me a chicken but overall I feel our regulations aren't really strict compared to some other states.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Sept 12, 2012 21:32:26 GMT -6
Bruce I have no plans to start anyone's balls rolling. I just wanted to know what it would take to do so. I wouldn't be opposed to trying to risk it if the "experts" say we have a chance. I'm not a chicken like iowatrapper.  Seriously though, I appreciate the level headed discussion on this.  |
|
|
|
Post by hvtrapper on Sept 13, 2012 5:05:57 GMT -6
To answer K9's question.
The ITA has one of each a legislative liason and a registered lobbiest.
|
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 13, 2012 7:04:22 GMT -6
LOL an ADC quote! "Bruce I have no plans to start anyone's balls rolling."
Thanks HV I thought that was the case. I feel we also have experts who are Directors and past Directors who have engaged in a lot of past Legislative actions and interactions with the DNR.
I am not chicken either but I'm also not going to assume someone elses caution is fear. Especially when that someone else has already been down the road that we are talking about travelling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Horn on Sept 13, 2012 10:09:14 GMT -6
I do think that we (Iowa Trappers) should have a plan in place (up dated as needed) in case the code sections do get opened by anyone. Each section of the code that applies to Trapping should be reviewed prior to the code being opened. SO AS TO NOT BE SURPRISED and have a plan for our actions.  That would have been easier to say if I knew how to spell contingency as in a contingency plan in place in the event that the code may be opened. |
|
|
|
Post by LLLTrapper on Sept 13, 2012 12:37:51 GMT -6
One great feature here on this sight is Spell check. Reading other trappers posts on T man reminds me of why I personally use the feature. LOL, LLL
|
|
|
|
Post by Horn on Sept 13, 2012 13:08:41 GMT -6
Thats how I spelled CONTINGENCY LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Sept 13, 2012 16:24:39 GMT -6
I do think that we (Iowa Trappers) should have a plan in place (up dated as needed) in case the code sections do get opened by anyone. Each section of the code that applies to Trapping should be reviewed prior to the code being opened. SO AS TO NOT BE SURPRISED and have a plan for our actions. That would have been easier to say if I knew how to spell contingency as in a contingency plan in place in the event that the code may be opened. I agree 100% and would bet that there are those who have plans in place quietly waiting |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2012 16:51:02 GMT -6
*Site not sight LLL |
|
|
|
Post by LLLTrapper on Sept 13, 2012 17:09:19 GMT -6
*Site not sight LLL That is a totally different subject. That young man was a play on synonyms. Meant to take the edge off a little. LLL |
|
|
|
Post by x-demoman on Sept 13, 2012 19:33:44 GMT -6
The ITA BOD has several contiguity plans shod there be a need/opportunity. Last year there was almost an opportunity to get into the use of artificial light but the group who initiated the proposal decided "they" had too much to loose and so little to gain. We had even talked to the DNR about our (ITA) approach. Gene Gotta love that spell check LLL, makes us all look pretty sharp |
|
|
|
Post by skunkboy on Sept 14, 2012 6:53:24 GMT -6
The ITA BOD has several [glow=red,2,300]contiguity[/glow] plans shod there be a need/opportunity. Last year there was almost an opportunity to get into the use of artificial light but the group who initiated the proposal decided "they" had too much to loose and so little to gain. We had even talked to the DNR about our (ITA) approach. Gene Gotta love that spell check LLL, makes us all look pretty sharp Musta forgot to push the spell check button? We get the message though. L8R...Ken |
|
|
|
Post by x-demoman on Sept 14, 2012 10:47:04 GMT -6
Yup I did check. Shod must have something to do with what horses wear on their feet. |
|
