|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
So do you get to define slob hunter?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
Because you think 3 is a fun season.
Because you think 3 is a successful season.
Because 3 doesn't hamper you on your 1600 acres.
Because only a few hunters were killing more than 3 anyway.
Because it works for you...you think everyone should abide by it? What's wrong with chosing 4 then? Some people would meet all thase criteria by killing 4 bucks some years. The state came up with 3 and you and 9er are about the only ones opposed to 3. I would say that's decent indication that most people would consider 3 bucks a successful season. Am I wrong? would 4 do it for you? If so should we change to 4 to make you and 9er happy? Heck, what about ol Joe down the road. he might need 6 to be "happy". Got to draw the line at some point. Again, if 3 is a bad number tell us why. Like I said, please find a property where only being able to kill 3 bucks is causing a problem for the deer herd. My property was just an example, but you can take it or leave it. I know you get the point, just hard to admit  as usual taking what I say and posting it out of context, so I'll re-type what I was saying...if very few people were killing more than 3 bucks to begin with then why would hunter numbers drop cause the limit is set to 3??? I never said they did. I get you point. If you wanted to hunt that 1600 acres by your self, would you damage the herd if you killed 4 one year? Heck no, and you know that, but I am about the greater good and the big picture. "If" I ever had the chance to kill 4 shooter bucks on my place in one year I would have no problem leaving the safety on to abide by the law. I'd rather be limited to 3 than know there is no limit. Maybe one day we can weed out the greedy and go to self management, but I doubt it. Also doubt being able to kill all you want would be applicable and help very many that do make sound management decisions. Look at who was killing and bragging about killing more than 3 prior to the 3 buck limit. You get the picture...not exactly the same hunters you would want to be educating hunters on managing deer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
So because you make decisions that you think are good management decisions, others should decide the same?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,494
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,494 |
To me that makes a lot more sense than saying shoot 3 no matter what your cirmunstances are. How is that QDM? It's not. As I said before, state limits are one thing. QDM is another. Here is the difference between you and I...bottom line...for some reason you think that most hunters are educated enough to choose to kill only what is appropriate for their land. I do not. I'm all about education but those of us that spend countless hours posting on this site are not the norm. There are and will always be too many slob hunters and clueless hunters out there that don't care anything about choosing to make good decisions or just don't know what decisions they should make. Unfortunately the state has to do it for them. Hunting is definitely not the only example of this in our society. I'm all about limited gov't but limited doesn't mean zero. You forgot to mention that before the three buck limit every hunter was shooting a buck everyday and that the whitetail population was near extintion and that is why the government had to come riding in on the great white stallion to save the day because nobody was learning anything from all of the education that they were getting at the time. From another post I read education and peer pressure seems to work, but you know that is just not as good as governmental force.
"After all, it is not the killing that brings satisfaction; it is the contest of skill and cunning. The true hunter counts his achievement in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport." Dr. Saxton Pope
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
Which is more important to you...that deer are managed like you think they should be or individual liberty?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
So do you get to define slob hunter? I'm sure you could define it yourself, but sure, why not? Slob Hunter...someone that pulls the trigger on every buck they get a shot at, regardless of where they hunt or how many bucks they have already killed.
Last edited by truedouble; 08/06/12 05:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
So because you make decisions that you think are good management decisions, others should decide the same? NO. But since you asked, aren't you a proponent of education? If so doesn't what you teach have some kind of premise? I mean it's got to be based on something you believe in doesn't it? If so, wouldn't you be trying to teach people what you believe is best? Just asking, cause you keep going back and misquoting me...stating that I believe everyone should manage their land like I do is not what I said or implied at all. I do think that people should make ethical decisions. Something wrong with that? . 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
And stopping some number of slob hunters (a number that we don't know) is worth giving up some of our individual liberty?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
So because you make decisions that you think are good management decisions, others should decide the same? NO. But since you asked, aren't you a proponent of education? If so doesn't what you teach have some kind of premise? I mean it's got to be based on something you believe in doesn't it? If so, wouldn't you be trying to teach people what you believe is best? Just asking, cause you keep going back and misquoting me...stating that I believe everyone should manage their land like I do is not what I said or implied at all. I do think that people should make ethical decisions. Something wrong with that? . Nothing wrong with that. Ethical decisions is what I want to teach. You are the one that thinks some arbitrary number you are happy with is OK. I am the one wanting to teach ethical decision making while maintaining individual liberty.
Last edited by jlccoffee; 08/06/12 05:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
Which is more important to you...that deer are managed like you think they should be or individual liberty? Good grief....not that again...but since you asked, Individual Liberty is more important. However, I do not feel that only being able to kill 3 bucks a season invokes on individual liberty... back at you...you are for the buck a day limit, correct??? by your apparent train of thought, how does a buck a day LIMIT, not impose on individual liberty,,, or how about an opening an close to the deer season?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I didn't say I want no limit or no season. If it doesn't damage the herd though, that would be fine.
Buck a day has already proven that it can work. Things were improving before the three buck limit.
Which is more limiting of individual liberty?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,378 Likes: 10
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,378 Likes: 10 |
You are the one that thinks some arbitrary number you are happy with is OK. I am the one wanting to teach ethical decision making while maintaining individual liberty. I was trying to sit back and enjoy this one but this "arbitrary number" is bugging me. The limit that was set was not arbitrary. The premise is that the State wanted to reduce the number of bucks harvested, thereby potentially saving a lot of younger age classes to move into older age classes. Statistically valid surveys indicated that a 4 buck limit would NOT reduce the harvest of bucks, 3 would by a small margin, but still statistically valid. Anything under, of course would also reduce buck harvest. Which is more limiting of individual liberty? Which is MORE limiting...Hmmm. Kinda like bows vs, spears, vs guns or Early season vs Feb hunting, Bait vs greenfields...or.....
Last edited by gobbler; 08/06/12 05:44 PM.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
I didn't say I want no limit or no season. If it doesn't damage the herd though, that would be fine.
Buck a day has already proven that it can work. Things were improving before the three buck limit.
Which is more limiting of individual liberty? LOL, that's funny..."more limiting" it's either limiting or it's not...if you are truly concerned with just ind. liberty then you would have to be against all game regulations. Can't ride the fence on that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,391
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,391 |
The choice is not between a buck limit and no management. Where did you get that idea?
Most clubs already have a management program in place. In fact, every club I know of in this area has some sort of goals.
Their plan can fit their circumstances. Exactly like Dr. Woods says.....not one size fits all.
I said absolutely nothing about no limit. You must have taken my statement completely wrong....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I was referring to bucktrot Norton.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I didn't say I want no limit or no season. If it doesn't damage the herd though, that would be fine.
Buck a day has already proven that it can work. Things were improving before the three buck limit.
Which is more limiting of individual liberty? LOL, that's funny..."more limiting" it's either limiting or it's not...if you are truly concerned with just ind. liberty then you would have to be against all game regulations. Can't ride the fence on that one. Really? It has to be all or nothing? I never said that. I never said I was against all game laws. Never said anything of the sort. I am for the lest restrictive possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
You are the one that thinks some arbitrary number you are happy with is OK. I am the one wanting to teach ethical decision making while maintaining individual liberty. I was trying to sit back and enjoy this one but this "arbitrary number" is bugging me. The limit that was set was not arbitrary. The premise is that the State wanted to reduce the number of bucks harvested, thereby potentially saving a lot of younger age classes to move into older age classes. Statistically valid surveys indicated that a 4 buck limit would NOT reduce the harvest of bucks, 3 would by a small margin, but still statistically valid. Anything under, of course would also reduce buck harvest. Which is more limiting of individual liberty? Which is MORE limiting...Hmmm. Kinda like bows vs, spears, vs guns or Early season vs Feb hunting, Bait vs greenfields...or..... Good to know about the thought process that went into the limit. It is still arbitrary from site to site. For some it is more restrictive than needed. For others it is not restrictive enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,378 Likes: 10
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,378 Likes: 10 |
Good to know about the thought process that went into the limit.
It is still arbitrary from site to site. For some it is more restrictive than needed. For others it is not restrictive enough.
Well, that is the problem with ALL restrictions. There needs to be general standards set - individual properties can make restrictions MORE restrictive but not less. To some limits are too restrictive, too some not restrictive enough. Do you think a quail plantation that has a bird per acre really NEEDS a 12 bird limit that the state set? Compared to most places in Alabama that has a covey per section. On the plantation, one shoot killing the limit has NO effect, on most places shooting a limit wipes out the whole property population. How about bass limits. The limit is 10 whether you are fishing a farm pond that is overstocked or Lake Jordan...arbitrary? Why is there a limit on squirrels and raccoons - are they in danger of being overhunted? Why is there a limit on snipe and woodcock - I don't know anyone who hunts them?
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I agree. For instance, I have suggested on here several times that I don't think there should be a squirrel season....if it was open year round I think we would still have a healthy squirrel population.
Many of those regulations are outdated in my opinion.
When we error, I think it should be to the side of too little restriction.
Have you ever read "The Road to Serfdom" by Friedrich Hayek? He was an adviser to president Reagan. There is a quote in there I will have to see if I can find and pull out for you.
|
|
|
|
|
