The problem with that argument is that you cant set all of the regs up to result in the quality being as chitty as it possibly can be and then claim that the state is not in the business of quality…..They are….. its just bad quality……Just like legalizing baiting for example and the impact its had…..That’s a management decision the state made for everyone that has decreased overall quality for many despite what the individual did or didn’t want…….For some the management decision they just made for everyone to increase the doe bag limits will decrease quality…..Extending the season into Feb in north Alabama is a management decision the state made for all of those hunters that decreased quality……You cant have your cake and eat it too on this one……If it’s acceptable to make management decisions for everybody that runs the quality into the ground then its acceptable to make ones for everybody that improves it
"claim that the state is not in the business of quality…..They are" I would argue that they are definitely NOT. Quality is NOT their business.
You used the word "quality" 7 times in regard to "management". Lets say I have 1,000 acres of land I want to manage for quail. Like predators on deer or turkeys, deer are competing directly and significantly with my quail management by eating all of the foods I want to manage for for quail. Therefore I want MINIMAL deer on my property. Will the State allow me to manage my deer herd as I see fit? Quality to one person is something TOTALLY different to someone else.
Last edited by gobbler; 11/23/2510:50 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
