|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
77 members (imadeerhntr, BhamFred, clayk, Tree Dweller, Big AL 76, CNC, Big Game Hunter, tombo51, Solothurn, timberwolfe, crocker, DGAMBLER, hallb, BLP, donia, gatorbait154, skymech, BayedUp, AWT6, Holcomb, 7PTSPREAD, Turkeytrott82, BCLC, Red Fox, NoHuntin, Shmoe, geeb1, Irishguy, Lvlhdd, Skullworks, dwaugh, BigEd, Gunpowder, Bmyers142, Chiller, KEITH, Joe4majors, goodman_hunter, tjmcdwll, SouthBamaSlayer, Brian_C, 3Gs, BearBranch, Okatuppa, buzzard, ronfromramer, brandonwells55, fur_n_feathers, 3006bullet, Geeb, Sixpointholler, centralala, DEDTRKY, marlin78, Reptar, 1hunter, trlrdrdave, bamabeagler, Morris, Whiskey9, Turkey, GomerPyle, outdoorguy88, aubarner, globe, dtmwtp, JLMiller, RSmith, JohnG, Beer Belly, 7 invisible),
927
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
Since it don't affect 96% of hunters as you state....why the pissin and moanin? You one of the 4%? And according to 9er hunter numbers are dropping every year b/c 4% of hunters might be effected by a buck limit???...yea, makes a lot of sense...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
Since it don't affect 96% of hunters as you state....why the pissin and moanin? You one of the 4%? I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better. anybody else feel like pounding there head into a block wall... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better.
Many people believe in limited government intervention and that the role of government should be regulation only where necessary and allowing the people to make choices beyond that with their local knowledge.
Others think it is best for the government to supply the answers through regulation and central planning.
You one of those? In a case where a selfish, irresponsible's individual's actions can affect the quality of hunting for many other folks in a given locale, WHILE not affecting the quality of hunting for 96% of licensed hunters....all day and twice on Sunday. The simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of Alabama's deer hunters do not have sole deer hunting rights to hundreds and certainly not thousands of acres. Folks who do are the exception and not the rule (you know that, and I know that, and anybody who is intellectually honest knows that) and as a result, they're situation should not drive subsequent regulation. As I've said before, I personally would not have a bit of problem if the state exempted individuals from the 3 buck limit if they can prove that doing so will not significantly affect the buck population in an invidual locale (ex. a person who has sole hunting rights on a 1000 acres). Ya'll continue to act like restricting someone's allowable buck harvest to a "ridiculous" ONLY 3 allowed is on the same infrigement upon individual rights plain as attempts at restricting gun ownership, or further taxation of millions of working Americans, or Obamacare, etc. Ya'll just sound like a bunch of whiney, dramatic women when you make such leaps. And that's how it starts. Do you also think it is ridiculous to allow clips that hold 30 rounds? Lots of people do. What about 29 rounds, 28 rounds. The simple fact is the overwhelming majority of people will never find themself in a situation where they need a 30 round magazine. Those few that do should not be the ones to drive regulation should they? People are quick to give up the liberties of the few when it doesn't effect them. Pretty soon someone wants you to give up something that does effect you. It's not about deer. It's about a model of government. don't confuse gun rights with game limits. Either oppose ALL laws or accept that some laws are necessary and some laws might need to be amended due to changes. It's completely acceptable to be ultra conservative, NRA card carrying, Republican, Tea Party member, etc. and still think that a 3 buck limit is a good thing.  9er loves to think otherwise but he even knows he is blowing smoke
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687 |
I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better.
Many people believe in limited government intervention and that the role of government should be regulation only where necessary and allowing the people to make choices beyond that with their local knowledge.
Others think it is best for the government to supply the answers through regulation and central planning.
You one of those? In a case where a selfish, irresponsible's individual's actions can affect the quality of hunting for many other folks in a given locale, WHILE not affecting the quality of hunting for 96% of licensed hunters....all day and twice on Sunday. The simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of Alabama's deer hunters do not have sole deer hunting rights to hundreds and certainly not thousands of acres. Folks who do are the exception and not the rule (you know that, and I know that, and anybody who is intellectually honest knows that) and as a result, they're situation should not drive subsequent regulation. As I've said before, I personally would not have a bit of problem if the state exempted individuals from the 3 buck limit if they can prove that doing so will not significantly affect the buck population in an invidual locale (ex. a person who has sole hunting rights on a 1000 acres). Ya'll continue to act like restricting someone's allowable buck harvest to a "ridiculous" ONLY 3 allowed is on the same infrigement upon individual rights plain as attempts at restricting gun ownership, or further taxation of millions of working Americans, or Obamacare, etc. Ya'll just sound like a bunch of whiney, dramatic women when you make such leaps. And that's how it starts. Do you also think it is ridiculous to allow clips that hold 30 rounds? Lots of people do. What about 29 rounds, 28 rounds. The simple fact is the overwhelming majority of people will never find themself in a situation where they need a 30 round magazine. Those few that do should not be the ones to drive regulation should they? People are quick to give up the liberties of the few when it doesn't effect them. Pretty soon someone wants you to give up something that does effect you. It's not about deer. It's about a model of government. don't confuse gun rights with game limits. Either oppose ALL laws or accept that some laws are necessary and some laws might need to be amended due to changes. It's completely acceptable to be ultra conservative, NRA card carrying, Republican, Tea Party member, etc. and still think that a 3 buck limit is a good thing. 9er loves to think otherwise but he even knows he is blowing smoke I think pretty much everyone knows he's blowin' smoke. 
"Why do you ask"?
Always vote the slowest path to socialism.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687 |
Since it don't affect 96% of hunters as you state....why the pissin and moanin? You one of the 4%? I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better. I find that very 
"Why do you ask"?
Always vote the slowest path to socialism.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
And that's how it starts. Do you also think it is ridiculous to allow clips that hold 30 rounds? Lots of people do. What about 29 rounds, 28 rounds.
The simple fact is the overwhelming majority of people will never find themself in a situation where they need a 30 round magazine. Those few that do should not be the ones to drive regulation should they?
People are quick to give up the liberties of the few when it doesn't effect them. Pretty soon someone wants you to give up something that does effect you.
It's not about deer. It's about a model of government.
In that case, you and and a whole bunch of others including myself.....should have raised total hell and rebelled against the government over the fact that we couldn't kill any does whatsoever and only 1 buck per day for all those years. I had to pass a bunch of deer back then and my rights were trampled on as a result. Think I'm gonna sue.  As I recall, not killing does went on too long and ended up really messing up the buck to doe ratio according to a lot of people as well as creating a herd that was beyond the appropriate carrying capacity of the land in areas. Maybe if the regulations were less restrictive, people who realized early on that their property was becoming overpopulated could have taken steps to correct the problem? Do you think it worked out better that they had to wait for the government to decide that for them?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I'm still still trying to figure out who is gonna pay for all these site specific limits, that's gonna get expensive There is a synopsis of The Road to Serfdom by Freidrich Hayek. He was an advisor to Ronald Reagan It's mostly about economics but can be applied to much of government in general. Read it and you will better understand why site specific limits set by the people more intimately involved with the local variables will trump a limit created by central planning. that goes back to my college days I'm still trying to understand just how in the hell we can regulate deer season at all on a site specific case, that would be extremely expensive, as of right now you can shoot and kill any as you wish under what the establishment has determined yea that sucks but there has to be some sort of regulation, we've seen what no regulation looked like, closed deer season and reintroductions into areas I really doubt AL wants to take on a season with varying limits per district or county etc.... just try and figure a way to regulate that now go back to my comment about cost at what point are you and most others willing to pay for this kind of situation We have also seen the population explode under a 1 buck a day limit. The earlier depletion of the resource was a different day and age. If we got back to that point, regulation would be necessary....but we aren't in that day and age.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 37,687 |
^^^^^ Jackson Co. only got the first 3 day does season in about '86. We could kill a buck a day though, and the State Biologist would tell us "if you have enough deer to shoot bucks, you have ehough to shoot does" that being prior to '86.
"Why do you ask"?
Always vote the slowest path to socialism.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
Since it don't affect 96% of hunters as you state....why the pissin and moanin? You one of the 4%? I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better. anybody else feel like pounding there head into a block wall... Like I said...it's about a model of government. If anyone wants to know why the country is going down the big government road, just look at these threads. Everyone says they are for small government....unless the government is doing something they want.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I have never killed more than 3 bucks in Alabama but I liked the old limit better.
Many people believe in limited government intervention and that the role of government should be regulation only where necessary and allowing the people to make choices beyond that with their local knowledge.
Others think it is best for the government to supply the answers through regulation and central planning.
You one of those? In a case where a selfish, irresponsible's individual's actions can affect the quality of hunting for many other folks in a given locale, WHILE not affecting the quality of hunting for 96% of licensed hunters....all day and twice on Sunday. The simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of Alabama's deer hunters do not have sole deer hunting rights to hundreds and certainly not thousands of acres. Folks who do are the exception and not the rule (you know that, and I know that, and anybody who is intellectually honest knows that) and as a result, they're situation should not drive subsequent regulation. As I've said before, I personally would not have a bit of problem if the state exempted individuals from the 3 buck limit if they can prove that doing so will not significantly affect the buck population in an invidual locale (ex. a person who has sole hunting rights on a 1000 acres). Ya'll continue to act like restricting someone's allowable buck harvest to a "ridiculous" ONLY 3 allowed is on the same infrigement upon individual rights plain as attempts at restricting gun ownership, or further taxation of millions of working Americans, or Obamacare, etc. Ya'll just sound like a bunch of whiney, dramatic women when you make such leaps. And that's how it starts. Do you also think it is ridiculous to allow clips that hold 30 rounds? Lots of people do. What about 29 rounds, 28 rounds. The simple fact is the overwhelming majority of people will never find themself in a situation where they need a 30 round magazine. Those few that do should not be the ones to drive regulation should they? People are quick to give up the liberties of the few when it doesn't effect them. Pretty soon someone wants you to give up something that does effect you. It's not about deer. It's about a model of government. don't confuse gun rights with game limits. Either oppose ALL laws or accept that some laws are necessary and some laws might need to be amended due to changes. It's completely acceptable to be ultra conservative, NRA card carrying, Republican, Tea Party member, etc. and still think that a 3 buck limit is a good thing. 9er loves to think otherwise but he even knows he is blowing smoke I agree that some laws are necessary. I am all for necessary laws but government gets in trouble when it starts going further than necessary. That is what we all claim to be against when we talk about the problems with big government. So I guess the question is why is a 3 buck limit "necessary"? I don't think it is.
Last edited by jlccoffee; 08/07/12 03:46 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997 |
Would ya'll please quit quoting truedouble, buckshot, clem, coldtrail, jughead, gobbler, cartervj and 2dogs in your posts?
I chose to ignore them because of their constant lies about my positon on conservation and hunting. Please accept my own words if you want to know my opinion. You won't get the truth about my opinion listening to those listed above.
When you quote these people in your posts, their lying shows up again, an I'd rather not see it. They will have to answer for it, so I'm content to go my separate way an leave them out of my discussions. Unfortunately, they can't accept that.
I think their intent is for me to waste time discounting their lies about my opinions and actions instead of debating the issues on their merits. That's a good indicator of a weak argument.
I don't intend to go down that road any more. I'm sick of it.
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't repeat their lies by quoting them in your posts.
Thanks,
Eddie
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,869
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,869 |
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Toggle the display of this post
"The only reason I shoot a 3.5" shell for turkeys is because they don't make a 4" one." - t123winters
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,130
Mildly Quirky
|
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 52,130 |
*** Tough. ***
Quote whomever you want.
This is an open website.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,255 Likes: 2
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,255 Likes: 2 |
Would ya'll please quit quoting truedouble, buckshot, clem, coldtrail, jughead, gobbler, cartervj and 2dogs in your posts?
Thanks,
Eddie He's start'in to sweat, Y'all got him on the ropes boys go for the kill!!!!!!!!!!
"And the days that I keep my gratitude
Higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days" Ray Wylie Hubbard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997 |
I really do not understand all this restricting peoples hunting rights. Every species of game animal has some kind of bag limit whats the big deal.I limited out two years ago with a week of deer season left(which could happen any year since I hunt on multiple leases) but did I stop hunting heck no! I just took other people with me. Hunted with my adult daughter, a friend that had never killed a buck and a friend's son so he could hunt by himself. I just do not see the problem...... You must be new around here. We've covered this over and over. Were you limited in your deer season for lawful reasons? Rules of the DCNR are only authorized when they are reasonable and necessary for the administration of our game and fish laws. Our game and fish laws do not authorize the setting of seasons and bag limits for wildlife management purposes on privateley owned and leased lands. I'll be glad to go thru it once more with you if you're genuinely interested in learning why I am concerned about unauthorized restrictions on our hunting rights. Here's what a federal judge said about one of the DCNR's rules that was being considered in court: Honorable Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Chief Judge, in his Findings and Conclusions, said:
"I would suspect that arbitrariness and capriciousness, and political motivation, as opposed to sound conservation practices based upon reasonableness, is also inherently involved; and I so consider it in analyzing and evaluating the evidence in the case." I can't think of a better description of the current buck limit/antler restrictions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
I really do not understand all this restricting peoples hunting rights. Every species of game animal has some kind of bag limit whats the big deal.I limited out two years ago with a week of deer season left(which could happen any year since I hunt on multiple leases) but did I stop hunting heck no! I just took other people with me. Hunted with my adult daughter, a friend that had never killed a buck and a friend's son so he could hunt by himself. I just do not see the problem...... If the bag limit is needed, that's one thing. If it's not, why have it? I have said before that I think we should do away with squirrel season. Does anyone really think that we need a squirrel season to protect the squirrel population? If we had no squirrel season I bet we would still have squirrels. People just don't hunt them like they once did. If at some time in the future we determined that we were overharvesting squirrels, at that point we would need to tighten the regulations. It's the same principle and the same idea of the role of government.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
Was it legal to set the bag limit on rabbits and squirrels at 8 a day? Why not 10 a day?
Was it legal to set the bag limit on coons to five per party when they obviously all over this state? Why not five a person?
Why is legal to tell me I can not shoot a black bear when I have almost as many bears as deer on my lease?
How can it possibly be legal to set the limits at what they are when there is no sound reason for it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997 |
bigt, The DCNR cannot make up it's own authority. Only the legislature can to that. Here's how the legislature authorized the DCNR to close seasons: (7) To close the season of any species of game in any county or area when, upon a survey by the department, it is found necessary to the conservation and perpetuation of such species and to reopen such closed season when it is deemed advisable. Was it necessary for you to quit hunting early for the conservation and perpetuation of the species? I don't think so. Somebody's idea of "herd health" was the reason you could not hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
I really do not understand all this restricting peoples hunting rights. Every species of game animal has some kind of bag limit whats the big deal.I limited out two years ago with a week of deer season left(which could happen any year since I hunt on multiple leases) but did I stop hunting heck no! I just took other people with me. Hunted with my adult daughter, a friend that had never killed a buck and a friend's son so he could hunt by himself. I just do not see the problem...... If the bag limit is needed, that's one thing. If it's not, why have it? I have said before that I think we should do away with squirrel season. Does anyone really think that we need a squirrel season to protect the squirrel population? If we had no squirrel season I bet we would still have squirrels. People just don't hunt them like they once did. If at some time in the future we determined that we were overharvesting squirrels, at that point we would need to tighten the regulations. It's the same principle and the same idea of the role of government. I can agree with you on this. I just do not see anybody talking about how it illegal to set squirrels limits or any other limits for that matter when there is obiviously not a population problem. Does anybody not care about the legality of all the limits?
Last edited by bigt; 08/07/12 05:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997 |
I certainly have maintained that any seasons that are set are to be in compliance with our game and fish laws.
That covers all game and fish species... even hogs and coyotes since the commissioner chooses to classify them as game animals while he calls them nuisance species.
|
|
|
|
|
