Brief(1)
Sub. for H.B. 2480 would delete the requirement that a fee be paid when a landowner or tenant wishes to transfer a hunt-on-your-own-land deer permit.
In addition, a new provision in the bill would require it to be the goal of the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP) to manage big game populations at levels consistent with existing habitat and landowner and community tolerance. This provision would authorize the Secretary of KDWP to issue big game control permits, in addition to hunting permits and game tags issued during regularly designated hunting seasons. The bill would allow the Secretary to designate the period of time, the location, and the number and type of big game that may be harvested. Use of these big game permits would require the permission of the landowner or tenant of the property where they are to be used. Further, the provision would require the Secretary to consult with representatives of farming and ranching organizations, county and city government associations, and hunting organizations in the development, modification, and implementation of a big game control permit program and would allow the Secretary to implement appropriate rules and regulations. These rules and regulations would not require an applicant to attempt to alleviate a problem with big game using any means other than hunting during the regular firearm season for the species of big game which is the problem.
Background
Numerous conferees appeared before the Committee on the original bill. Many of the conferees supported any type of amendments to current law which would address the deer population issue. Several conferees appeared in opposition to the bill, specifically with respect to the provisions which would have required the Secretary of KDWP to provide for a controlled shoot of deer upon the request of a landowner or governing body of a city.
The fiscal note on the original bill states that it would reduce state revenues and increase state expenditures, but that the full impact cannot be estimated at the present time. The fiscal note states that according to officials with KDWP, the potential revenue loss could be significant because hunters would be allowed to hunt without licenses, big game permits, and game tags. The fiscal note states that if big game hunters decide to use the controlled shoots to obtain deer, the loss of revenue to the Wildlife Fee Fund would be significant because it could affect federal apportionments received from the sale of hunting licenses. The fiscal note also states that the bill would cause a loss of $3,000 in revenues to the Wildlife Fee Fund in FY 2000 because the hunt-on-your-own-land transfer fee would no longer be assessed when a landowner or tenant transfers a hunt-on-your-own-land permit to a family member.
1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/bill_search.html.