A lot of factors helped create the decline in wildlife populations: the Civil War, Reconstruction, market hunting, the Depression and until the early 1900s no wildlife laws or regulations.

The same helped a decline in bird populations, too, especially market hunting and the fashion industry in the U.S. and Europe. Not just waterfowl, either. Songbirds were sold in markets in the Northeast and elsewhere. Christmas holiday shoots were big deals for families and towns, a sort of celebration. The annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts were begun as a way to inventory birds but also try to stem the tide of the excessive shooting.

The restoration of deer, turkey and other wildlife in the Southeast is pretty amazing.

Who's advocating for no regulations?

Oh. No one.

Ah, I knew you'd chime in. You can't help yourself.

So I'll explain again, one final time and clearly enough that even you may understand since I know you're an intelligent guy. I know that. You and others who keep wanting more laws and regulations and whatnot are smart guys. You just can't help wanting everyone to be in lockstep, though, and that won't happen.

I don't want zero regulations and never have advocated for that. Ever. You and a few others get on the "anarchy!" kick because it's easy to be a knee-jerk reactionary throwing out idiotic labels instead of understanding that some folks just don't want or like more intrusion than what we have.

However, the reality is that laws and regulations exist and in some cases are needed. Conservation is one of them.

That's the reality. We have them. We just don't need MORE of them or to an excess or to the degree that people finally say "Ah, screw it." and quit.

See how that works? I know you do.

So, to reiterate: Who's advocating for no regulations?

Oh, right. No one.