Sorry guys this will be a long one because at the end I have provided the Statutes (You really want to pay attention to them) I have wanted to get out into the Public.

Randy, I agree and disagree with you with the details. If there are check stations I want validation of what is harvested. I will get flamed for this next thing, I refused to send in my survey this year under protest. It is my belief, known by many I totally disagree with collecting the information, then making an assumption from that information, without determining the validity or accuracy of the data. It is my belief also that many tags are not filled legally, but if there was a mandatory self report, all you would get back is the type of tags released mostly, not a true indication of what was taken. You also know my opinion that many whitetail only or doe only are filled with either a Mulie buck or a whitetail buck, and if reported is reported by the tag.

If we made policy on that information (which we have done) we may make an incorrect choice which dramatically affects the deer herd. HMMMM, sounds like something like that has happened. MY concern was/has been that the Agency has an operation problem. Enforcement is an issue when talking about voluntary self report. Meaning if the hunters are compelled to their internal moral compasses...self report will yield garbage data. If enforcement actions indicate the will of the KDWP, the will is very low. With 69 CO' s, there is could be legal basis for a regulation not really law if the agency refuses to enforce. (Remember this is not a reflection on the field personnel, it is the agency using monies not for their intended purposes.)

Another poor expenditure is KDWP attorneys. We do pay them ... we have some on staff ... what are they doing with the prosecution issue with CA' s and DA' s is inexcusable. I found the statute that requires the CA and DA to prosecute and report. This is their legal duty. IF they have not supported enforcement, they are in breach of legal duty, they can be recalled, disbarred, and can never be a judge again. Now why do we have an att' y on staff, and most of the ideas and reasons come from some very PO' ed hunter, compelling the b-crat to do the damn job we are paying them for. These state agencies do not deliver services to the people of Kansas very effectively, efficiently, or cheaply.

Dana Brown


Chapter 32.--WILDLIFE, PARKS AND RECREATION
Article 10.--ENFORCEMENT
32-1053.

County or district attorneys' duties; prosecution fee. It shall be the duty of each county or district attorney to prosecute any person or persons charged with a violation of any of the wildlife and parks laws of this state or rules and regulations of the secretary. The attorney so prosecuting shall receive the fee established by law or by the court having jurisdiction over the matter for each prosecution in a district court, and such fee shall be taxed to the defendant in every case where conviction shall be had. History: L. 1911, ch. 198, § 32; R.S. 1923, 32-132; L. 1973, ch. 134, § 37; L. 1976, ch. 145, § 155; L. 1989, ch. 118, § 139; July 1.


Chapter 32.--WILDLIFE, PARKS AND RECREATION
Article 10.--ENFORCEMENT
32-1054.Report of prosecutions.

It shall be the duty of every judge or clerk of the court before whom any prosecution for a violation of the wildlife and parks laws of this state or rules and regulations of the secretary is commenced or goes on appeal, within 20 days after disposition thereof, to report in writing to the department the result thereof and the amount of fine collected, if any. History: L. 1911, ch. 198, § 33; R.S. 1923, 32-133; L. 1973, ch. 134, § 38; L. 1989, ch. 118, § 140; L. 2001, ch. 185, § 3; July 1.