# Foolish DNR Rules, Regulations and Laws



## Shotgun Kennel

Just wondering what specific rules or laws people think are outdated, or just plain foolish.

One which that I think is just plain dumb is; During bow season, I can bow hunt and with a CPL I can carry a pistol capable of killing a deer, I can coyote hunt with a long gun during bow season. However I can't take a long gun to my blind to kill the stinking coyote if I have a bow with me. Silly just plain silly.

What is one of your pet peeve laws which make no sense.


----------



## boomer_x7

I can use a bow,crossbow,firearm,and black powder to kill deer but i cant use a spear...


----------



## bear catcher

The fact that we have 2 firearms seasons before the bowhunters get to start chasing the deer with our arrows. It used to be nice starting bow season with relatively calm deer instead of alarmed deer that had been shot at for 2 weeks !
It takes a couple of weeks for them to calm down !


----------



## boomstick

bear catcher said:


> The fact that we have 2 firearms seasons before the bowhunters get to start chasing the deer with our arrows. It used to be nice starting bow season with relatively calm deer instead of alarmed deer that had been shot at for 2 weeks !
> It takes a couple of weeks for them to calm down !


There's really 3 season before bow. Youth, handicap and early doe. 

No hunting on Sundays GMA!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Birddogm33

That some A_hole can sit in your treestand even though you have your name plastered all over it!! Having to take down your pop-up every night!!!


----------



## boomer_x7

Birddogm33 said:


> That some A_hole can sit in your treestand even though you have your name plastered all over it!! !!!


Yeah thats a good one:rant: Does that apply for ice shantys too...????


----------



## sbooy42

boomer_x7 said:


> Yeah thats a good one:rant: Does that apply for ice shantys too...????


 I believe the answer is yes as long as its not locked...


----------



## Rooster Cogburn

One of my main complaints is unregulated commercial bear baits on public land, with no enforceable restriction on how many sites they can operate using "so-called employees" each can add an additonal 12 bait sites to the size of the operation...and they are selling exclusive use at each bait site. and that's what the customer is paying for. MDNR is strictly against exlusive use on public land, but that is what is going on. And there are plenty of confrontations in the bear woods because of it. Same goes for guided bear hunts over hounds. With reduced bear numbers, they need to run more bear baits than the law allows...because the three bait limit is not enforceable unless MDNR required baits be tagged using issued ID tags. And, it would nice to have meaningful enforcement against commercial operations on CF land so sportsmen had a place to hunt without having to compete with illegal commercializers having a negative impact on their success.


----------



## James Dymond

Birddogm33 said:


> That some A_hole can sit in your treestand even though you have your name plastered all over it!! Having to take down your pop-up every night!!!


Put your name and address on it and you don't have to take it down.

Jim


----------



## Moose57

bear catcher said:


> The fact that we have 2 firearms seasons before the bowhunters get to start chasing the deer with our arrows. It used to be nice starting bow season with relatively calm deer instead of alarmed deer that had been shot at for 2 weeks !
> It takes a couple of weeks for them to calm down !


----------



## brookie1

bear catcher said:


> The fact that we have 2 firearms seasons before the bowhunters get to start chasing the deer with our arrows. It used to be nice starting bow season with relatively calm deer instead of alarmed deer that had been shot at for 2 weeks !
> It takes a couple of weeks for them to calm down !


You think that's bad, imagine how I feel. I hunt firearm and have to put up with all those seasons plus bowhunters stinking up the place for a month and a half as well as small game hunters everywhere for two months, including grouse hunters with dogs. I'm lucky I even see a deer. And I can't believe bow season is open from November 1 to the 14th. What a stupid rule that is, right at the prime start of the rut.


----------



## musicman34

James Dymond said:


> Put your name and address on it and you don't have to take it down.
> 
> Jim


True, but for treestands only. For pop-up blinds, you must have your name and address on it on public land, and you must remove it every day until November 6. That's the one that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to me. What is so special about November 6?


----------



## GIDEON

Are you guys going deer hunting or on safari?


----------



## Ranger Ray

Foolish? You are about to learn the real meaning of foolish. Wait until they establish quiet areas in the national forests. Our fearless leaders will not be able to reason that there already is a quiet time in the woods and the fact that those that seek it, should have to share with others and wait their season. Instead they will give them their own area, or several. Are we going to have a gun only area? A bow only area? A loud only area? How about a partridge only area? Then maybe a squirrel only area, and trapping area only. Who gets the prime area? Who gets the crap area? I mean if you want to be fair, than everyone gets their own area, not season. Right? New foolish social laws, coming to an area near you. Who would have thought, Fred Trost, the visionary of the bunch.


----------



## Pinefarm

This isn't as much a stupid rule, but simply an outdated one. I assume the rule was put in place decades ago before ample antlerless tags/antlerless harvest and when few bowhunted.

During Nov.15-30, if a bowhunter chooses to hunt with a bow, he now must use his combo tag on bucks only. So if a guy kills a buck with a firearm on Nov. 15 but decides he doesn't want to kill another buck, and is in an area with no antlerless tags, he's kind of forced to shoot another buck only if he wants to participate, unless he get get access somewhere else that may offer antlerless tags.

Yet, that same hunter on the same land can use his combo tag or archery tag to kill an antlerless deer with his bow from Oct.1-Nov.14 and Dec.1-Jan.1. It makes no sense in the 21st century to make it so bowhunters must be bucks only Nov.15-30.

I'm sure it's an old rule, when rifle season up north was king and the fear was that someone would poach a doe and try to claim they shot it with a bow.

But now, with 300fps plus compounds, xbows, half the hunters who prefer archery hunting over using a firearm, there's no reason not to change it so the weapon dictates the rules, not so much the dates. 

Basically, archery season rules don't need to be suspended Nov.15-30, if a hunter chooses to use a bow or xbow during those dates. Layer firearms season over the existing archery season rules, which should remain open. 

The reality is, not many would do so and it would have virtually no negative impact to the resource yet it would offer more choice and opportunity.


----------



## magnumhntr

Trespassing laws need to be stricter with a higher penalty.


----------



## jackbob42

Shotgun Kennel said:


> ....
> What is one of your pet peeve laws which make no sense.


Our "quiet season" for hounds.


----------



## krea

I think it does apply to shantys as well, but you can lock it. The crappy thing is if someone leaves a line in ur hole, u are the one who gets a ticket...happened to me


----------



## bear catcher

I agree, Trespassing fines and penalties should hurt ! Especially now that our trail cams can get such a pretty photos of them strolling on thru !


----------



## boomer_x7

heres something i never got.

Poach a deer, turkey,or bear- fines: deer=$1000, turkey=$1000, bear=$1500, lose your license for that year and next 3 years

Drunk as hell while hunting,possably putting the rest of us in danger-
Fines= $500, and/OR 93 days in jail. But we will let you go out and get drunk next season


----------



## brookie1

Justin said:


> We really need a DNRE rep on here to answer questions.


Most of the complaints have nothing to do with them. A couple are but most are from the legislature and some are from the NRC. That's what is silly about starting a "stupid dnr law" thread.


----------



## boehr

Robert Holmes said:


> They need to change the law that requires your weapon to be unloaded before and after shooting hours. I hunt in the LP now. When I hunted in the UP I had places where I walked in a mile or more and it was not uncommon to see wolves during daylight. Mine was loaded from the time that I got out of the truck until I put it back in the gun case. The DNR might call it illegal but I called it common sense. Besides the DNR officers always carry a loaded gun or two or three.


Maybe you need to come out before dark so the boogie man doesn't get you.:lol:


----------



## Justin

brookie1 said:


> Most of the complaints have nothing to do with them. A couple are but most are from the legislature and some are from the NRC. That's what is silly about starting a "stupid dnr law" thread.


I realize that. The DNR just enforces the laws, which would make me think that somebody in the department would know the reasons for the laws. Maybe not.


----------



## River Keeper

johnhunter247 said:


> I am puzzled by the whole baiting thing.
> First baiting was legal. Then they set a bait limit. Then they banned it supposedly because of disease. Then they brought it back with a limit. You can't bait where you hunt before Oct. 1 (even though you can hunt now before Oct.1), but you can bait outside your house year round within 100yds? Deer can't catch disease next to the house? Since they brought it back they must feel now that disease isn't that much of an issue so why can you bait year round by the house but not cant set up feeders on private land where you hunt? I am glad that I am a food plotter. I can have a 1/2 acre or a ten acre bait pile and the deer get fed year round and are comfortable there.


 I think that is for folks that just want to see deer not hunt them.But i do understand where your coming from.I wonder how this works with Mineral blocks ? I know farmers cant have them any closer then 150 yrds.And you must not be able to see it from your house . Crazy Laws. River Keepr


----------



## brookie1

Justin said:


> I realize that. The DNR just enforces the laws, which would make me think that somebody in the department would know the reasons for the laws. Maybe not.


Fair enough. Maybe someone who has been around awhile may at least know where some of it came from. I suspect some of it is "just because."


----------



## River Keeper

You know i read alot in this thread.Some good. Some bad.Why cant we have someone sit down with the DNR from this sight and show some of our thoughts ? This has been a very good read.It would be a shame not to let them know about some Laws that are pretty dumb.River Keeper


----------



## bassdisaster

musicman34 said:


> Allowing treestands to be left set up on public land already causes issues of claiming an area to hunt for the season. Why are treestands legal to be left overnight but not pop-up blinds? With either one the owner faces theft. My question is, why can pop-up blinds be left set-up overnight from November 6 until after the season? Did the NRC just pull a date from a hat and call it good? What is it about November 6? This makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. Can anyone figure out why they chose November 6?


Again it goes back to claiming the area, as most popup blind hunters will likely be firearms hunters, that date is about when most ground blinds for firearms deer season are placed.

BD


----------



## Petronius

johnhunter247 said:


> I am puzzled by the whole baiting thing.
> First baiting was legal. Then they set a bait limit. Then they banned it supposedly because of disease. Then they brought it back with a limit. You can't bait where you hunt before Oct. 1 (even though you can hunt now before Oct.1), but you can bait outside your house year round within 100yds? Deer can't catch disease next to the house? Since they brought it back they must feel now that disease isn't that much of an issue *so why can you bait year round by the house but not cant set up feeders on private land where you hunt?* I am glad that I am a food plotter. I can have a 1/2 acre or a ten acre bait pile and the deer get fed year round and are comfortable there.


You can set up feeders on private land.The following was taken from Rules for Baiting and Feeding Deer http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10366_37141_37705-250077--,00.html

The volume of bait at any hunting site cannot exceed two gallons.

The bait must be dispersed over a minimum of a 10-foot by 10-foot area.

The bait must be scattered directly on the ground. It can be scattered by any means, including mechanical spin-cast feeders, provided that the spin-cast feeder does not distribute more than the maximum volume allowed.


----------



## Leader

The "shotgun zone".


----------



## boehr

Justin said:


> I realize that. The DNR just enforces the laws, which would make me think that somebody in the department would know the reasons for the laws. Maybe not.


After 26 years I know many of the reasons for many of the laws but why would I want to even argue with someone about why the law is like it is, it will not change their mind and just create a pissing contest. Too many of the suggestions, as mentioned before by me and by at least one other person, is the individual wants the law change to benefit them, no other reason. There is always someone looking for a loophole in the law so that they can find a way to be a legal poacher (maybe to strong of a word for some but that's my opinion) basically. If you look at some of these same laws mentioned and have hunted for any length of time and seen things that so called sportsmen have done then most you can figure it out for yourself. Read the law like a poacher instead of a sportsmen, the reason might become clearer for many, not all the suggestions but many. Hunters have a firearm, animals have their senses, laws help with fair chase and safety which is what makes it challenging and fun to do along with a sport. If you don't want the challenge and just a promise to take an animal then go to a fenced hunt.


----------



## Justin

boehr said:


> After 26 years I know many of the reasons for many of the laws but why would I want to even argue with someone about why the law is like it is, it will not change their mind and just create a pissing contest. Too many of the suggestions, as mentioned before by me and by at least one other person, is the individual wants the law change to benefit them, no other reason. There is always someone looking for a loophole in the law so that they can find a way to be a legal poacher (maybe to strong of a word for some but that's my opinion) basically. If you look at some of these same laws mentioned and have hunted for any length of time and seen things that so called sportsmen have done then most you can figure it out for yourself. Read the law like a poacher instead of a sportsmen, the reason might become clearer for many, not all the suggestions but many. Hunters have a firearm, animals have their senses, laws help with fair chase and safety which is what makes it challenging and fun to do along with a sport. If you don't want the challenge and just a promise to take an animal then go to a fenced hunt.


You should notice that I never said a CO would know. I wouldn't expect that. The rest of your post is spot on, however there are some honest questions.


----------



## Barry

Why is it that an able bodied hunter can legally shoot deer from inside a home but not a parked vehicle. IMO, both are unethical but only one is illegal. 

Hunting from the home became legal when the raised platform law was passed. Next baiting became legal which suddenly made hunting deer from the home an efficient technique. Now people are hunting from elaborate raised blinds so its hard to argue any difference between a blind and a home. Hard to argue with that logic...... 

Hunting from the home is an unintended consequence of the law which legalized raised platforms. But too late to fix now! Again! just my opinion.


----------



## boehr

Wheels and an engine that cause mobility and that's the difference. Actually they can from a parked car if they have a Hunt From a Standing Vehicle Permit.

Jason, I did notice you never said a CO could but my post did indicate that I could for a lot of them but I won't which is the same reason that others won't too.


----------



## Shotgun Kennel

River Keeper said:


> You know i read alot in this thread.Some good. Some bad.Why cant we have someone sit down with the DNR from this sight and show some of our thoughts ? This has been a very good read.It would be a shame not to let them know about some Laws that are pretty dumb.River Keeper


The DNR will tell you these are laws if they get changed they must be changed through the legislative process. I intend to meet with my state senator to talk about some of this and other things. However, one way to get your voice head is through MUCC. You can go to regional meetings and voice your opinion. They actively lobby on behalf of all people concerned about our natural resources and game laws. 

For instance one group is petitioning the DNR, through MUCC and the legislative process to bring back the sportsmans license and consolidate the timing for permit applications. This was implemented from just a few people getting the ball rolling.


----------



## sniper22mag

bear catcher said:


> The fact that we have 2 firearms seasons before the bowhunters get to start chasing the deer with our arrows. It used to be nice starting bow season with relatively calm deer instead of alarmed deer that had been shot at for 2 weeks !
> It takes a couple of weeks for them to calm down !


 100% agree with this


----------



## sniper22mag

johnhunter247 said:


> I am puzzled by the whole baiting thing.
> First baiting was legal. Then they set a bait limit. Then they banned it supposedly because of disease. Then they brought it back with a limit. You can't bait where you hunt before Oct. 1 (even though you can hunt now before Oct.1), but you can bait outside your house year round within 100yds? Deer can't catch disease next to the house? Since they brought it back they must feel now that disease isn't that much of an issue so why can you bait year round by the house but not cant set up feeders on private land where you hunt? I am glad that I am a food plotter. I can have a 1/2 acre or a ten acre bait pile and the deer get fed year round and are comfortable there.


They brought it back because they where loosing money. :smile-mad


----------



## dsgt1

being able to hunt preditors w/rifles in shotgun zone but not deer and hunt yotes w/rim fire only @ night. this is foolish to me


----------



## Trophy Specialist

How about the stupid lake trout regulations in the MH1 zone (northern Lake Huron). Sport anglers must abide by a slot limit and are forced to release the vast majority of fish caught, of which many will die anyway. At the same time/place, Indians can net lakers with gill nets and keep all they want with no size limits. That law is beyond foolish.


----------



## SMP

Lots of excellent examples of some laws that do not make any sense. I also must admit that I was not aware of one of the laws posted.

Great thread


----------



## Robert Holmes

Trophy Specialist said:


> How about the stupid lake trout regulations in the MH1 zone (northern Lake Huron). Sport anglers must abide by a slot limit and are forced to release the vast majority of fish caught, of which many will die anyway. At the same time/place, Indians can net lakers with gill nets and keep all they want with no size limits. That law is beyond foolish.


 If sport anglers catch too many lake trout and go above a certain weight. I don't know how the DNR figures it out. Anyway sporties surpass the weight and the DNR has to pay the federal government which in turn pays the tribes. Most of the local sporties throw all of the greaseballs back anyway and the local native fishermen hate us for doing so. The native american fishermen have a special net now that catches whitefish and not so many lake trout. It seems unless the market price is high they don't want them either.


----------



## Robert Holmes

boehr said:


> Maybe you need to come out before dark so the boogie man doesn't get you.:lol:


 Not a problem, I hunt 140 miles south of the UP the wolves have done their damage in the UP. I hunt where I know there is lots of does and spikehorns to shoot. I let em go and let em grow when my freezer is full.:lol::lol::lol:. I actually only kill one deer per year I do not care what it is and I can prove that whatever I kill does not have a bearing on QDM in the area that I hunt. Yes, I do have a legal tag for the deer. BTW if I wanted to hunt in the UP I could kill 5 deer per year on my wife's tribal license if I could talk her into getting one.


----------



## Shotgun Kennel

Robert Holmes said:


> Not a problem, I hunt 140 miles south of the UP the wolves have done their damage in the UP. I hunt where I know there is lots of does and spikehorns to shoot. I let em go and let em grow when my freezer is full.:lol::lol::lol:. I actually only kill one deer per year I do not care what it is and I can prove that whatever I kill does not have a bearing on QDM in the area that I hunt. Yes, I do have a legal tag for the deer. *BTW if I wanted to hunt in the UP I could kill 5 deer per year on my wife's tribal license *if I could talk her into getting one.


Really? You can shoot deer on a license your wife purchases? Does not sound legal to me.


----------



## Robert Holmes

My wife is a tribal member who is handicapped and unable to kill,gut or drag a deer by herself. If she were to get a tribal hunting license (as long as she is present) I could kill up to 5 deer per year on her license. I could also fish with a gill net. I do not see a need to do this so I buy a MDNR buck tag and get a couple of doe permits and hunt downstate. As for fishing I always have fillets in the freezer.


----------



## sbooy42

Robert Holmes said:


> My wife is a tribal member who is handicapped and unable to kill,gut or drag a deer by herself. If she were to get a tribal hunting license (as long as she is present) I could kill up to 5 deer per year on her license. I could also fish with a gill net. I do not see a need to do this so I buy a MDNR buck tag and get a couple of doe permits and hunt downstate. As for fishing I always have fillets in the freezer.


I was not aware of this rule.
Thanks


----------



## DEDGOOSE

Enclosed blinds are legal for turkey hunting


----------



## James Dymond

The limit is set at seven sturgeon- after two are taken the season is over.


Jim


----------



## hunting man

Bow season for deer that lasts for 6 straight weeks. It closes for 16 days then opens for 4+ weeks more.


----------



## DIYsportsman

hunting man said:


> Bow season for deer that lasts for 6 straight weeks. It closes for 16 days then opens for 4+ weeks more.


If u are referring to bow season closing during gun season, if u want u can use a bow during gun season...


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## hunting man

10 weeks of bow hunting is what I was talking about.


----------



## Shotgun Kennel

My State Senator, Dave Robertson, met with my wife and me. We had a good two-hour discussion about some of this as well as other things. He was very receptive and will be looking into some issues. Thanks for the input. We could not hit on every topic but I appreciate the thought starters. 

I urge others to contact their reps do discuss anything going on in our state which matters to them individually or sportsmen in general.


----------



## john warren

brookie1 said:


> You think that's bad, imagine how I feel. I hunt firearm and have to put up with all those seasons plus bowhunters stinking up the place for a month and a half as well as small game hunters everywhere for two months, including grouse hunters with dogs. I'm lucky I even see a deer. And I can't believe bow season is open from November 1 to the 14th. What a stupid rule that is, right at the prime start of the rut.


 interesting that small game hunters are of so much less importance then deer hunters.


----------



## brookie1

john warren said:


> interesting that small game hunters are of so much less importance then deer hunters.


That post was a sarcastic response to another post about the early seasons ruining archery season. I am one of those second class citizens also known as a small game hunter.

But as long as the thread is continuing, why is it that the size limit for brook trout on type 1 streams is 7 inches, but the general size limit is still 8 inches on non trout streams.


----------



## ridgewalker

The Guide Book prescribes the manner in which deer are to be tagged. As seen in photos and in the media, this rule is violated more than the baiting laws were or are. I am writing about the manner in which the tags are affixed/attached to the deer.


----------



## kzoofisher

Agree with Shotgun that talking to your Senator or Representative is a great way to get your voice heard by the DNR. Overhauls and simplification of rules is actually a pretty expensive process and I don't think the Wildlife Division is going to undertake it without pressure from the legislature and some sort of support for the expense. But, please, don't complicate the situation by asking for a bill to protect your particular interest. The rules get outdated and burdensome fast enough that we don't need the DNR to request an act of congress every time something needs to be changed. If an overhaul is done it will have plenty of public hearings and comments, speak your piece or join/form a group of like minded people and make sure the DNR knows what you think.


----------



## dogwhistle

you guys are expecting logic from a beuracracy. rules and laws are promulgated according to who has the most political clout and influence not for what is best for hunting and game animals.

until hunters stop being nice guys and become proactive, filing suits against the dnr, we will continue our downward tred. you may not win the lawsuit, but practices will change anyway as no one wants to be sued. this practice is working quite well for the sierra club.


----------



## boehr

dogwhistle said:


> you guys are expecting logic from a beuracracy. rules and laws are promulgated according to who has the most political clout and influence not for what is best for hunting and game animals.
> 
> until hunters stop being nice guys and become proactive, filing suits against the dnr, we will continue our downward tred. you may not win the lawsuit, but practices will change anyway as no one wants to be sued. this practice is working quite well for the sierra club.


One major problem with your logic. As individuals I doubt very much that one would want the finacial burden for a lawsuit. As far as a bunch getting together to make it more affordable then you would have to have everyone agree and it is obvious from this thread alone that there are so many different opinions they would destroy themselves.:evil: Do forget either that even this thread isn't what is best for the natural resources it is what is best for "me".


----------



## bear50

The use of a crossbow should be during gun season only. It is not archery !! Few years of this and the deer herd will be low !


----------



## wildcoy73

The crossbow permit. I don't need a permit for my other weapons.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## buckmaster221

I read this thread and was amazed at some of the laws that are out there. There have been some good ideas and some not so good ideas. 

Getting the law to change is a time consuming and expensive process. Just look at some of the laws that are still on the books NOT related to hunting. I believe there is still a law on the books here in Michigan that says a woman may not cut her hair WITHOUT her husbands permission. How many husbands are going to try that one on for size? It's a stupid rule that's still on the books. Other than Jeffery Fieger, I don't think there's an atty. out there that would touch that lawsuit.

One thing I would like to see changed is not a law at all. I think we would all agree that having public land to pursue our outdoor activities is a good thing. However, too many times I have been out small game hunting on public land and ran in to people who didn't even know hunting season was going on. I cannot find fault with that if they choose not to hunt, it's their right and I respect that. However, if you are going to use public land for hiking or horseback riding or whatever you choose, you should be required to wear hunter orange from Sept. 15 to Mar. 31. Those are the dates set forth by the DNRE for shooting on public land. I'm not talking about target shooting, that is illegal unless at a designated range. I'm talking about shooting a firearm. A buddy of mine almost shot a squirrel a couple of weeks ago in the same direction a couple was pushing a stroller with a baby in it through the woods. They were just out for a walk which is their right to do so. Luckily, my buddy didn't take the shot because he heard the baby giggle. It was a hilly area and they were on the other side coming towards him.

How do you get the word out to non-hunters? Post signs at trail heads stating that the outermost garment must be hunter orange if you are using the woods during the above mentioned dates. And it should apply to EVERYONE, INCLUDING HUNTERS. I know some of you are saying but what about archery deer, turkey, bear and waterfowl seasons where you are not required to wear it. While this is true, what would it hurt to wear the orange to and from your set-up? The other way to make light of it would obviously be the news media, print and tv. Another way would be to inform everyone when they renew their plates. Plates must be renewed every year and the majority of people who access these places do so by car and then by foot or whatever. It could help prevent a tragic accident.


----------



## trapperopie

y can hound hunters hunt for ***** oct. 1st but trappers have to wait till nov. 1st. doesnt make to much sense when the hides dont even prime up till after the 1st of nov.


----------



## dead short

Because during the November firearm deer season "archery" season is closed and you have to comply with the firearm deer regs. You are no longer an "archery deer hunter", you are essentially a firearm deer hunter using a bow. 


Posted from my iPhone.


----------



## tjstebb

dead short said:


> Because during the November firearm deer season "archery" season is closed and you have to comply with the firearm deer regs. You are no longer an "archery deer hunter", you are essentially a firearm deer hunter using a bow.
> 
> 
> Posted from my iPhone.


See i understand this but, why even allow bowhunting during firearm season then? you can't hunt with a firearm during bow season even if you abide by the bowhunting rules. Just seems silly i guess, Its not anything i would stand up and protest about or anything

tjstebb


----------



## dead short

That's just the way it is I guess. I don't think most people would find that there is an unfair advantage to using archery equipment during firearm season, but the other way around.......probably. 

And this will lead into.......


Posted from my iPhone.


----------



## alpena black dog

brookie1 said:


> You think that's bad, imagine how I feel. I hunt firearm and have to put up with all those seasons plus bowhunters stinking up the place for a month and a half as well as small game hunters everywhere for two months, including grouse hunters with dogs. I'm lucky I even see a deer. And I can't believe bow season is open from November 1 to the 14th. What a stupid rule that is, right at the prime start of the rut.


 Right on!!!!! Lets give the deer a break for the first two weeks in November. The SPECIAL hunters have more than enough time to hunt!


----------



## Whitetail_hunter

alpena black dog said:


> Right on!!!!! Lets give the deer a break for the first two weeks in November. The SPECIAL hunters have more than enough time to hunt!


Gun hunters complain complain and complain while bowhunter actually take advantage of this great time. Really you have one option cry or get a bow and hunt.


----------



## Leader

Whitetail_hunter said:


> Gun hunters complain complain and complain while bowhunter actually take advantage of this great time. Really you have one option cry or get a bow and hunt.


Not as bad as bow hunters bitchin' about Crossbow hunters.


----------



## boehr

tjstebb said:


> See i understand this but, why even allow bowhunting during firearm season then? you can't hunt with a firearm during bow season even if you abide by the bowhunting rules. Just seems silly i guess, Its not anything i would stand up and protest about or anything
> 
> tjstebb


You don't have a half million small game hunters out there over a two week period and big difference between shot shells and single projectile.


----------



## brookie1

alpena black dog said:


> Right on!!!!! Lets give the deer a break for the first two weeks in November. The SPECIAL hunters have more than enough time to hunt!


That post was a sarcastic response to another post about the early seasons ruining archery season.


----------



## notmuchtime

Well that was 20 minutes I'll never get back. Why not move this thread to the Sound Off section?


----------



## wartfroggy

boehr said:


> Again, most of these posts about stupid laws are because the particular law don't fit in to the posters game plan.


 Well, then here is one that really needs to be changed. Not because it doesn't fit me, but because it doesn't fit at all, 10 months out of the year.
Sable River, Mason County, between the state park dam and Lake Mich. 
Gear restrictions....single unweighted hook, no more than 3/8 of an inch. Yes, I understand that it is to prevent snagging, but that used to be a seasonal restriction, which it should be again. While alot of salmon are snagged in that river, there is alot of other fishing the rest of the year. There are alot of pike, some walleye, bass, perch, ect, ect. But, if I put on a spinnerbait to throw for bass or pike, I am in violation because it is a weighted hook larger than 3/8". Could I snag a fish with a spinnerbait if I wanted to? Good luck! Topwater plug...I would have to take off all treble hooks and replace with a small single hook. A teardrop or small jig for perch....nope, it is weighted.


----------



## boehr

wartfroggy said:


> Well, then here is one that really needs to be changed. Not because it doesn't fit me, but because it doesn't fit at all, 10 months out of the year.
> Sable River, Mason County, between the state park dam and Lake Mich.
> Gear restrictions....single unweighted hook, no more than 3/8 of an inch. Yes, I understand that it is to prevent snagging, but that used to be a seasonal restriction, which it should be again. While alot of salmon are snagged in that river, there is alot of other fishing the rest of the year. There are alot of pike, some walleye, bass, perch, ect, ect. But, if I put on a spinnerbait to throw for bass or pike, I am in violation because it is a weighted hook larger than 3/8". Could I snag a fish with a spinnerbait if I wanted to? Good luck! Topwater plug...I would have to take off all treble hooks and replace with a small single hook. A teardrop or small jig for perch....nope, it is weighted.


Really? "Not because it doesn't fit you"? Must be nobody that fishes that part legally then but, if you say so.


----------



## Diogenes

The idea that it is somehow wrong or selfish that we want exceptions that make sense to overly restrictive laws is foolish. It is just as selfish for the enforcers to want them to be ridiculously strict so they won't have to use discernment over who actually committed a real crime instead of a made up "because we can regulate you" crime.


----------



## boehr

"Real crime"? Ok, don't want anyone in trouble over pretent crimes but again, whatever you say.


----------



## Diogenes

boehr said:


> "Real crime"? Ok, don't want anyone in trouble over pretent crimes but again, whatever you say.


Not wearing a hunter orange hat while hunting rabbits on private property is not a real crime. It's a made up "because we can regulate you" crime. It's not legally required for plinking, shooting skeet or turkey hunting. It's a foolish rule and it is no more selfish for me to want a private land exception in that rule than it is for the enforcers to want to require me to wear it. The same is true with a number of other rules mentioned in this thread.


----------



## wartfroggy

boehr said:


> Really? "Not because it doesn't fit you"? Must be nobody that fishes that part legally then but, if you say so.


 Well, since I haven't fished that river in years, probably a couple of years before the rule changed, it has nothing to do with what "fits me". And to the second half of your question, for most of the summer, very few people fish it legally. Most are tourists, many who rarely fish, and I would imagine hardly anyone knows the rules on it. Lots of spinners, crankbaits, Some get tickets for their ignorance, most don't, but like I said, it really is pretty pointless.


----------



## ridgewalker

Diogenes said:


> Not wearing a hunter orange hat while hunting rabbits on private property is not a real crime. It's a made up "because we can regulate you" crime. It's not legally required for plinking, shooting skeet or turkey hunting. It's a foolish rule and it is no more selfish for me to want a private land exception in that rule than it is for the enforcers to want to require me to wear it. The same is true with a number of other rules mentioned in this thread.


Rather than debating about the appropriateness of a rule, it might be wise to give some thought to someone putting a bullet through that orangeless head, from a neighboring property, because they did not know that you were there. Also when a rule is written, not every exception can be anticipated unless you want to carry a reg book around that is several feet thick.


----------



## Diogenes

ridgewalker said:


> Rather than debating about the appropriateness of a rule, it might be wise to give some thought to someone putting a bullet through that orangeless head, from a neighboring property, because they did not know that you were there. Also when a rule is written, not every exception can be anticipated unless you want to carry a reg book around that is several feet thick.


This thread is about the appropriateness of rules. If I was walking around plinking on private property, I would not be required to wear orange. If I shoot at an animal, I would be. Whether I am safer (or not) from a bullet trespasser when I'm carrying a gun, is not something I need the government to decide for me. I am both smart enough and ethical enough to not require wardrobe selection assistance from the DNR before I pull a trigger. The belief that some of the enforcers have that it is appropriate for them to be deciding which of the people without orange hats are good guys and which are bad guys is just selfish. It isn't that hard to add an exception to a rule to keep it from creating a made up crime.


----------



## boehr

Diogenes said:


> Not wearing a hunter orange hat while hunting rabbits on private property is not a real crime.


Get a ticket for it and a misdemeanor on your record and tell me how real it isn't.:lol:

When hunter orange first became law it wasn't required on private land but there were some that had nothing to do with the DNR and because of incidents thought it was a safety issue. That is how it became a law by the legislature and not the DNR but has proved to make hunting safer. If one understood how laws were made then one wouldn't use plinking as part of an arguement but then maybe that is part of your issue to start with, you don't know how laws are made into law and what can be done.:yikes:


----------



## Diogenes

Not only did I once fly private planes, I also skydived. The "we're going to boss you around for your own safety" story doesn't impress me in the least.

It's really pretty simple. The people who write state laws have police powers over certain privileges, like the driving of motor vehicles on public roads and the taking of state-owned wildlife. They abuse the authority this gives them so they can create a nanny state. Because constitutional challenges are so expensive, these abuses become accepted in the same way that the Gestapo, KGB, and Stasi policies became accepted. Many of these abuses are anti-gun laws, because it's easy to make controls related to the use of firearms seem reasonable to people who don't think very clearly. Then the enforcers use these overreaches to throw their weight around as they please without concern for whether they are actually doing something that the state has a valid interest in.


----------



## kzoofisher

Diogenes said:


> It's really pretty simple. The people who write state laws have police powers over certain privileges, like the driving of motor vehicles on public roads and the taking of state-owned wildlife. They abuse the authority this gives them so they can create a nanny state. Because constitutional challenges are so expensive, these abuses become accepted in the same way that the Gestapo, KGB, and Stasi policies became accepted. Many of these abuses are anti-gun laws, because it's easy to make controls related to the use of firearms seem reasonable to people who don't think very clearly. Then the enforcers use these overreaches to throw their weight around as they please without concern for whether they are actually doing something that the state has a valid interest in.


There are a couple of threads going on this site right now either specifically looking for "loop holes" or wondering how far they can push the envelope and still avoid prosecution. The tireless efforts of criminals and those who believe that *unconvictable*=*ethical* is what makes our laws so cumbersome. The state has a responsibility to protect the majority of us from the few, that requires constant tweaking of laws to make explicit to violators what was already clear to ethical sportsman. I'm sure someone will respond wanting to know who decides what is ethical and the answer is simple; society does when it makes laws and regulations.


----------

