# Rep: Hunters should cover up carcasses



## duckslayer (Oct 30, 2003)

Rep: Hunters should cover up carcasses
Associated Press
Published Sunday, December 17, 2006

BISMARCK - Dead deer and other big-game animals would have to be covered up by hunters who transport them on highways, under a legislator's proposal.

Rep. Duane DeKrey, R-Pettibone, is proposing a requirement that big-game hunters cover up their dead animals on an interstate or state highway when returning from their hunt.

DeKrey, who is a deer hunter, said he has seen dead and field-dressed deer in pickup beds, on trailers or tied to vehicles, sometimes dripping with blood.

"I couldn't help but wonder what the general public thinks about that," he said.

"You hear non-hunters and anti-hunters talking, and that's repulsive to them. I can personally understand how they could be offended by that," said longtime deer hunter Brandon Mason. "It doesn't help the cause of sportsmen much, but it's a natural part of the hunt.

"As a sportsman," Mason said, "it's kind of neat to see what everyone got."

DeKrey said his proposal is "for discussion only," and he doubts it will go far.


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

If I have to cover up my big game because it's repulsive, then ugly people need to wear a ski mask, even if they're in their own car.


----------



## taddy1340 (Dec 10, 2004)

Horsager said:


> If I have to cover up my big game because it's repulsive, then ugly people need to wear a ski mask, even if they're in their own car.


 :rollin:


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

Haul your deer on your hoods, bumpers, roofs.......give the non hunting folks a reason to join the anti hunting ranks......THINK for just one minute past an ego


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

Hunter_58346, I have a topper on my truck and don't own a receiver hitch rack or roof rack. You'd have to look pretty hard through the tinted windows to discern what's back there, even then stuff is usually packed in such a way as to keep onlooker's from spotting anything desireable. Be it guns in cases, antlers, cooler full of meat, etc.

Funny is funny, deal with it.


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

Wasn't this Decrey the same ----------- in the last session that wanted open up gratis tags so they could be transferred to friends and business associates a outfitters dream. and doesn't he or some family member have a connection with a outfitting operation?


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

adokken said:


> Wasn't this Decrey the same ----------- in the last session that wanted open up gratis tags so they could be transferred to friends and business associates a outfitters dream. and doesn't he or some family member have a connection with a outfitting operation?


DING DING DING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> Wasn't this Decrey the same ----------- in the last session that wanted open up gratis tags so they could be transferred to friends and business associates a outfitters dream. and doesn't he or some family member have a connection with a outfitting operation?


What in the world does that have to do with the point the guy is making ..............nothing, that's what. The guy is right. Not only is it offensive to non-hunters but it is stupid to transport your game openly like that anyway. Amazing to me how some always look to discredit someone they may not like, even if that person is correct. Hunter_58346 has it right, use common sense.


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

Adrian,,,WHat??? Are you confused??


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Horsager said:


> If I have to cover up my big game because it's repulsive, then ugly people need to wear a ski mask, even if they're in their own car.


I think they call it a burka or something like that.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

I wonder how many of us have ever really met a crazed anti hunting person? I lived in WI and you had a lot of them. Covered, uncovered it makes no difference to most of them. The carnage left from a deer semi encounter is absolutely more offensive to th eye than a deer in the back of a truck or on a trailer going down the road!

While there are a lot of things that can and do influence non hunting people in their views of us, this ranks down the line a lot farther than canned hunts especially in small confined places! Watch how he votes and speaks concerning this issue and you will see why some like AD asked the question.

Maybe I am wrong, but I see a hidden agenda behind this bill!


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

I actually would support this bill. I don't understand what is so hard about putting a tarp over your deer. People must like the taste of dust and exhaust on their meat huh. :eyeroll:


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

I am not confused, just wonder what Decrey is up to. It always arouses suspicion when a politician comes out with a do good agenda. That bill about gratis tags was a do good agenda also. I think in Kansas they are selling gratis tags on E-Bay. Have no problem if you want to cover your deer. Hide your trophys when some one that is against hunting comes into your home so they will not be offended


----------



## target (Aug 10, 2006)

HUNTNFISHND said:


> I actually would support this bill. I don't understand what is so hard about putting a tarp over your deer. People must like the taste of dust and exhaust on their meat huh. :eyeroll:


There is nothing hard about putting a tarp over your deer. But, why should I have to? Why now adays do I have to watch my every word, every step and every breath just to please someone who is going to be upset no matter what I do.


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

I never said a thing about what goes on in your own home. If there are stipulations atattched to the bill, then throw it out, I agree. Alittle common sense goes along way.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Well Ron, I've never met a crazy radical anti hunter either. But those guys I don't even worry about. No matter what you or I do they will always be around and nothing will change what they think or do.
But it's the 90% of the people who don't hunt but don't care about it one way or another that I worry about! These are the important group of voters and taxpayers that will untimately determine whether you or I will continue to hunt in the future. We need their support or at least DON"T need their condemnation. 
If the sight of a dead animal disgusts them and turns them off, then it is only prudent for us hunters to cover them up, or at least don't display them in all their bloody gore in public. Why risk turning them over to the "Dark Side?"
I don't think this needs to be a law! There's much more important things for politicians to worry about, but I do think we need a bit of common sense. 
This would be an uneeded law, but the thought behind it is pretty close to the mark. At least as close as Dekrey will ever come.


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

target,

The simple answer is because those people are the ones who can be swayed to the anti's side by seeing your dead deer draped over your hood dripping blood all over the road!

Do you want to be able to hunt in the future? Is covering your dead deer until you get home too much to ask to be able to continue hunting in the future? Think about it!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

If they have hunters conceal their harvested animals then they better have them display something in their windshield indicating they are transporting game, or it will become an enforcement problem.

This may or may not be a good idea, but it is a poachers dream. I wonder if, with everyone concealing game and no game check stations in North Dakota like some states require, it will be tougher to apprehend violators.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

This kinda stuff is really getting sickening. You can't pray in school cause it might offend someone. Stores don't wanna say Merry Christmas cause it may offend someone. Now cover your deer cause it might offend a non-hunter. GIVE ME A BREAK! I think we have a lot more to worry about these days than covering our harvested deer.

Dekrey can cover his own deer if he likes. Like someone said if he really wants to do some good for the hunting community, ban canned hunts.

Cover your deer. What a joke.


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

Yep....Just hang your deer in the front yard and make sure to put a rib spreader in. You are right,,,it is your front yard, do what you want with it. I noticed the local butcher shop hauling a freshly slaughtered steer hung by the old gallows down the highway yesterday. Same thing I guess.
Somebody's dads's hurry up and slap these idiots!!!!


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

Hunters should cover up thier carcasses......Politicians should cover up thier mistakes better !!!


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Interesting that some of the same people who complain of being politically correct with our dead animals use the absolutely silly, transparent, politically acceptable term like "HARVEST' to refer to killing, shooting, trapping, etc. of animals. Are we trying to bamboozle people into thinking we aren't really killing something??? Talk about being politically correct!!! Who are we trying to kid??
Biologically we "harvest" the surplus of a given population, buit we do this by shooting, killing, trapping or otherwise removing the surplus of a given population, not "Harvest" each individual animal or bird! Even road kill counts in our "Harvest!"
Sorry to stir the pot, but this silly word "Harvest" is rapidly climbing to the top of my pet peeve list of dumb politically acceptable terms! Wish I could catch the guy that dreamed that one up!
The only animal I ever "harvested" was a skunk or two and a porcupine run through the combine!


----------



## Lil Sand Bay (Feb 2, 2005)

Its strange; here in Wisc. it is illegal to transport a concealed carcass, it must be in open view.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

Habitat Hugger said:


> Interesting that some of the same people who complain of being politically correct with our dead animals use the absolutely silly, transparent, politically acceptable term like "HARVEST' to refer to killing, shooting, trapping, etc. of animals. Are we trying to bamboozle people into thinking we aren't really killing something??? Talk about being politically correct!!! Who are we trying to kid??
> Biologically we "harvest" the surplus of a given population, buit we do this by shooting, killing, trapping or otherwise removing the surplus of a given population, not "Harvest" each individual animal or bird! Even road kill counts in our "Harvest!"
> Sorry to stir the pot, but this silly word "Harvest" is rapidly climbing to the top of my pet peeve list of dumb politically acceptable terms! Wish I could catch the guy that dreamed that one up!
> The only animal I ever "harvested" was a skunk or two and a porcupine run through the combine!


That'll be the next thing Dekrey comes up with "We must not use the word kill when talking about hunting. It might tramatize our youth. Causing them to become violent." :wink:

I'm surprised he's Republican. All this sounds like something a Democrat would come up with.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

I see the logic behind this but I also see the illogic. Like he said, "I don't think this will go very far!." However, rural North Dakota is no longer as rural and all the kids who were raised on the farm where you butchered hogs, chickens, geese, ducks and whatever now live in the cities and are no longer used to the reality of everything that goes into the meat we have on the table. To me it is a non issue and our legislature should spend their time on things that are important but to others it is a big deal. In my opinion if you want to cover up your game, fine but if you want to drive around with it in the back of your truck or on top of your vehicle that is fine. What happens if you shoot a deer and you have the family car? Would you rather tie it on the top or throw it in the trunk. I think it is a no brainer that you should tie it on top of the car. However, this is common sense and sometimes common sense does not always prevail. I think we have plenty of rules as to what we can or cannot do and we need other things done in Bismarck besides this.


----------



## taddy1340 (Dec 10, 2004)

Lil Sand Bay said:


> Its strange; here in Wisc. it is illegal to transport a concealed carcass, it must be in open view.


In regards to deer transport in WI, that changed a few years ago, mostly due to this very topic. You used to have keep the tailgate open years ago...not so anymore there.


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

We shoot our deer and put them in the back of our truck and drop them off at the butcher shop in the town where we stay. We are mostly on backroads so why the heck should I be told to tarp the deer?? Are you kidding that someone is proposing this?? Wouldn't it be refreshing if this rep. would maybe work on the problems of outmigration, attracting business, lowere taxes etc. How about requiring a tarp for junk/garbage in the back of a truck or on top of a car?? Next up let's tarp those horse/cattle trailers as they might offend with sight and smell. Anything else come to mind guys???


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

Eric,

This would not apply to you. He is talking about state and interstate highways, not backroads.


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Thanks for the info. It has been one of those days and it's nice to vent on something so this issue seemed like an easy target.


----------



## GooseBuster3 (Mar 1, 2002)

We drive 450 miles back to our house with them sitting on the racks of the 4 wheeler. Those anti's can kiss my ***. I wouldnt support that bill at all.
BTW a massive dead muley looks better then a fat girl riding shotgun!!


----------



## cbass (Sep 9, 2003)

yeaaaaaaaaaaaah buddyyyyyyyyyy :beer:


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

> BTW a massive dead muley looks better then a fat girl riding shotgun!!


Now that is funny stuff right there!!! Classic Tyler line!!!


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

GooseBuster3 said:


> BTW a massive dead muley looks better then a fat girl riding shotgun!!


Try convincing Zach that :wink:


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

:rollin: :rollin:


----------



## hydro870 (Mar 29, 2005)

> Well Ron, I've never met a crazy radical anti hunter either. But those guys I don't even worry about. No matter what you or I do they will always be around and nothing will change what they think or do.
> But it's the 90% of the people who don't hunt but don't care about it one way or another that I worry about! These are the important group of voters and taxpayers that will untimately determine whether you or I will continue to hunt in the future. We need their support or at least DON"T need their condemnation.
> If the sight of a dead animal disgusts them and turns them off, then it is only prudent for us hunters to cover them up, or at least don't display them in all their bloody gore in public. Why risk turning them over to the "Dark Side?"
> I don't think this needs to be a law! There's much more important things for politicians to worry about, but I do think we need a bit of common sense.
> This would be an uneeded law, but the thought behind it is pretty close to the mark. At least as close as Dekrey will ever come.


I think this post is by far the most intelligent response to the proposed bill. Well said! :beer:


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Todd Porter said this AM that Dekrey was withdrawing the bill, sounds like most of the emails and calls made it clear that the people of ND did not like his PC proposal!!!!!!!!


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Story available at http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles ... casses.txt

Published on Sunday, December 31, 2006.
Last modified on 12/31/2006 at 12:26 am

*Cover carcasses? Not in Montana*

Montana remains most certainly a hunting state and seeing dead elk, deer and antelope in the back of pickup trucks appears to be just a function of fall.

Voters in our GazOutdoors.com poll were asked, "Should hunters be required by law to cover their game while transporting it?" The final vote wasn't even close - 35 said no, they shouldn't, while only 3 said yes, cover them up.

As one blog poster noted, "In some states, the law says deer or bear must be displayed outside the vehicle in plain sight. Makes it easier for Fish and Game officials to check tags, etc., when they set up road blocks and have troopers and game wardens pull over cars with deer."

Added another, "Why do we have to be so politically correct? It's a part of our hunting heritage and if the people from out of state can't handle it, too bad. Plus, covering an animal, especially when warm, will increase chances of it spoiling."

The poll question came in the wake of North Dakota state Rep. Duane DeKrey, who is also a hunter, proposing a new law that would require hunters to cover their dead game while driving down state and federal highways in North Dakota. _DeKrey noted that he didn't think the proposal would fly there._ It certainly wouldn't fly in Montana or Wyoming.


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

Well I think the next step for him is to let someone else take his place who might actually address issues that matter....


----------



## rowdie (Jan 19, 2005)

Even if this rediculous law passes (which it won't) I can gaurantee that the boys on the rez will not cover them up :beer:


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Eric Hustad said:


> Well I think the next step for him is to let someone else take his place who might actually address issues that matter....


Why Eric?? Because he doesn't go along with your way of thinking?? I've been spending time at the legislature for many years now and Duane DeKrey is one of the few legislators that votes for what his people want. You may not like him and give him an a F or Z whatever but let me tell Duane is one hell of a conscientious guy. On the other side, 10 years ago I felt as you do about Duane about Al Carlson. In past several years I've had the pleasure to attend many functions in your fair city. One person you will always find there will be Al Carlson. I've gotten to know Al and he is a dedicated individual same as Duane.

As far as this bill goes I think it has merit, probably not now but I'll bet we will see it in the near future. I really don't care what a poll of 40 people on the gazebo gazette in Montana have to say. Go ask the women in ND how they feel. Remember Eric they vote also. :wink:


----------

