senator patty ritchie 2012 sportsmens survey comments on nuisance permits

7/31/2019 Senator Patty Ritchie 2012 Sportsmens Survey Comments on Nuisance Permits

1/4

Senator Patty Ritchie 2012 Sportsmen's Survey

Your comments on "Nuisance Permits"

"Nuisance permits" should be issued where they can be justified. They should not become a "favor" to a

landowner but should allow a landowner to protect their investment from depredation where justified. The rumor

mill certainly seems to say that way too many are issued, but I don't necessarily believe it. I have personally

taken one deer on a nuisance permit while an employee at an airport and was happy to have the meat. Deer

are definitely a life threatening hazard at airports.

access to farm land using background checks that the hunter would pay for themselves

allow them with restrictions.

animals are going to the feed , there is no food in the big woods , so dont punish the animals .

as needed

at a cost per deer

could be used better

coyotes

Depends on if it's for deer.

DONT ALLOW ANY!!! none are needed, if the land owner would allow ppl to hunt. they could do this by signing

a no fault agreement between land owner and hunter. i have done some of them in the past

encourage dmaps before giving nuisance permits

end abuse of them

Experienced hunter should be asked to help control wildlife on private land before any nuisance permit is issued.Fewer permits

Fewer, with better regulation

Fine as long as zones/numbers are based on sound wildlife management practices.

Fine,if used properly & not abused

from what i have seen the nuisance permits are being missused

Good Management

Good when necessary. DEC should do more to research each individual property.

hunters are a nuisance

Hunting seasons should be longer and bag limits increased for nuisance animals (such as Canada Geese)

I believe these permits would not be necessary if the DEC would work with landowners for more hunter access.I think it is well managed. Should not be eliminated

I think they are abused.

i think they are over used but necessary. maybe issue less permits

I think they may be necessary but that only if they landowner allows public hunting.

i think they should reduce the amount of permits issued

If a hunter applies for a nuisance permit if there are still permits available it should be granted.

if land is posted should not get them

If nessesary, they are OK.

In select areas of deer population it is a tool to control deer but it should be monitored closely

individual decision, not State's

issue ads necessary

issue as needed

issue but issue less

issue more doe permits

Issue where necessary

Issued by the state as needed

it depends on deer density in a given area.

it is not hard to get one. It should stay the same

Its fine the way it is no more or no less.

its fine the way it is.

JUST FOR FARMERS

Keep better control of them!


2/4

keep program but not more

let people who have no where to hunt get permission to use the nuisance permits to fill thier tags a lot of people

spend good money to see few deer

Limit issuance of permits

Limit the number

Limit them more

limited

limited numbers given hunters from land owners

Limited use.

make farmers open there land to hunters. Then there would be no need for nuisance permits

make more DMP for thoes areas

Many are misused.

maybe in the southern zone not in the north

more appropriate number for the number of deer in the area

More control over the permits that are issued.....

more scrutiny

more strictly regulated

More stringent criteria must be met before nuisance permits are issued.

More tightly controlled but neccessary

My limited knowledge makes me think they are being managed well.

necessary for farmers whose farms are being threatenedNecessary, and help manage deer. Should be on lottery system like DMP's unless proven nuisance exists. Not

all farms should recieve tags due to size. Documented nuisances should exist such as damage to crops etc.

from years prior.

nuisance animals HAVE to be dealt with. Doing this without a permit makes a person a criminal.

nuisance pemits should be given to farmers who can establish or document an economic loss to proven crops

or some other measure of need

Nuisance permist should be based on need, not acerage

Nuisance permits allowed only after all local hunters are asked to participate

Nuisance permits and DMAP's should be eliminated. Instead offer more DMP's and required

landowner's/farmers to allow legally licensed hunters harvest the "nuisance" animals.

Nuisance permits are giving land owners an early season to get their vension and depletes the white deer

Nuisance permits are necessary when/where reason exists.nuisance permits are not always used correctly!

nuisance permits are often mis-used by land owners by not being used. Give them to the sportsmen who will

use and consume the deer.

Nuisance Permits need to be stopped. I have heard of farmers in my area just shooting the Deer and letting it

ROT!! If permits are issued they should be made to give the meat to some one to use.

nuisance permits should be allowed only when other means have been exhausted, ie opening problem areas to

licensed hunters.

nuisance permits should be givien to hunters that use meat to feed family not just to thin out deer on farms or

large lots of land ..

Nuisance permits should be more regulated, they are handed out in areas where the deer population is already

low.

nuisance permits should be offered to landowners and a portion of the permits should be mandated to feed the

hungry. If the deer are destroying their land and they need the population controlled, they should have no

problem feeding the hungry at the same time.

Nuisance permits should not be allowed to be sold by the landowner to hunters. If a landowner is truly

concerned about deer management, crop loss, then they make their land/nuisance permits available via lottery

or something to those that want to hunt. There are other states that do this type of program and they seem to

have success.

nuisancepermitaregood but giveit to all hunter not gust to farmer and when dec goes out to do hurd kills and

gust let the carcas laytheir thay aut to let hunters have an opertunity to hunt them to consum

Nusiance permits are needed but should be regulated better

offer more doe permits


3/4

ok if not abused

Ok, when not abused.

okay with the idea, but there should be fewer issued.

on a as needed issue

only if the property owner opens hunting to the public

Only in certain circumstances when it is truelly needed

only to farmers

Open up the area's to hunters where the problem is. The DEC is allowing the farmer to wipe out the deer herds

in their area's.

permits are abused found deer shot and never recovered yet farmer would not allow hunters to harvest the

animal but his freezer is full

Permits should be issued but only to the farmers that are losing crops to the deer.

PROOF OF THE NUISANCE

Prove nuisance

Raise the number of allowed take for deer

Restructure permit use, allow sportsmen to hunt private land where nisance permits are given, allowing the

public to benefit from the permits, and the land owner to benefit from the taking of nuisance animals.

should be based on stats from population studies to keep numbers in every region under control.

should be better monitored

should be issued but closely regulated andmonitored for compliance and need

should be monitored better on who gets themshould be monitored more closely

Should be used in moderation, ie, only if you are having crops destroyed. Also people who get the permits need

to report deer harvest and reasons for harvesting.

should depend on region

should issue more to people who own less that 50 acres

should only be issued for special circumstances such as crop damage

Should remain the same; lottery

So much private land is locked up that population management by hunters on public land is nearly impossible.

As hunting pressure on public lands increase, deer naturally gravitate to areas with less pressure. Some

mechanism should be in place to encourage these people to make nuisance permits available to the public. If

the animals are truly causing damage to crops then allowing the issuance to others should be encouraged., to

limit the number of permits to select few peoplestate currently gives to many out

State should validate the true need for the permit and the farmer should be reuired to show damages done by

the animal.

status quo should continue

stay the same

Still have some but less of them and make them truly open to public not just landowners friends

The DEC issues nuisance permits at the appropriate levels, as required.

The farmers or land owners should allow hunters to solve there problem with over population of deer, no

nuisance permits, just let hunters do thier thing instead of posting the land, along with that , no hunter has the

right to sue any land owner if injured on his land other then direct negligence of the land owner like shooting

some one

The only ones that benifit are farmers

The permits should be issued on case by case need, with a limit on male deer. Too many winery owners shoot

large bucks before season.

The standard of proving property damage to obtain nuisance permits is currently acceptable and appropriate

The state should give "nuisance permits" on a strict basis.

the state should issue them but it needs to be controlled alot more and have dec out there checking it more.

the state should regulate the # of permits it offers depending on herd size and winter kill

The state should still have some but less

the statew should limit their permits to the current number


4/4

The system for nuisance permits is just right

there abused

there needs to be a system to allow hunters to help reduce deer populations for the landowner before nuisance

permits are issued

there should be a limit on the amount of deer that you can shoot.

these permits are necessary but need control and follow up to assure they are being used for their intended

purpose

They are a good idea.

They are a necessity for some circumstances

They are abused.

they are fine to an extent

They are helpful where needed

They are legally mandated to be available in certain cases.

They are nessesary but they issue to many,and need more control who gets them and how many

They have been misused. Should be stricter parameters for their issuance

they should be a case to case study some places they are need other places they are not

they should be a case to case study some places they are need other places they are not

They should be given to non land owners only to give them an oppertunity to bring some deer home to enjoy.

They should be issued to farmers only, if they have had a significant crop loss. Additionally, there has to be

something considered to prevent people from abusing the correct use of nuisance permits.They should be regulated

they should be treated like normal hunting only in day time hrs

they should do away with them more deer are killed with them then any dmp and they shoot them and let run off

and die never to be used

They support illegal activities . ban them

they used to be needed, not now

this question only muddies the water, destroy permits or DMAPs or DMPs?

those who are issued permits should allow hunting for the public

tighter controls needed

Too lopsided. Can't evaluate degree of nuisance. Must have limits.

too much abuse

Too much abuse and misuseTotal BS- if you have a deer problem dont post your land. Let others hunt it.

unposted land only !!!

useful for farmers

VERY limited

Very Limited Use!

What we have is fine

where absolutely nessary

where needed they are important

While nessesary, they should be better regulated

Yes if there is a constant issue on your property.

senator patty ritchie 2012 sportsmens survey comments on nuisance permits

Documents