- Deleted by Sligh1
Off top of my head …. The amount of “3rd buck tags” being registered to tracts of 2-10 acres for example was in the thousands statewide or possibly 10’s of thousands. I can’t recall exact # but it’s SUBSTANTIAL. Does that mean 3 bucks are shot off “5 acres”? NO. But the amount of tags allocated on 2, 5, 10 acres for bucks & those filled is no small #.
The ? Is this…. Can we sustain or justify an extra buck tag based on anyone owning 2 or 5 or 10 acres? The answer is NO in my strong opinion, based on: biology, our current hunting situation statewide & our current access issues. When we have cut the Harvest in HALF & the state’s #1 & #2 issues are: access to land to hunt & abundant game/quality experience (healthy balanced herd blended into that point) …. We MUST make some changes. When thousands of BUCK tags are being allocated for a 2 or 5 acre tract statewide & we are literally killing off opportunities for hunters to the point that they are becoming very loud & frustrated & quitting, etc - we have to make course corrections.
I’d personally like no 3rd buck tag PERIOD but we have to start somewhere. We cannot keep the direction we’ve been going & see the abuses of the segmented land further degrade experiences of other hunters. Let’s look at it from another POV…. If the law was 40 acre minimum TODAY to get a 3rd buck tag …. If we had a law being debated to drop it from 40 acre minimum down to 2 acres (or 5, whatever) …. What justification would we use for that change????
I am very well aware that ANY bill is gonna have some “upset parties” & there’s NOTHING that’s perfect. NOTHING. Including our current regs which are full of imperfections & problems- FULL. Our hunting dynamics have changed rapidly in the last 10-15 years & we must course correct. This stuff is MINOR….. “I can only shoot 2 bucks & 12 does”. It’s MINOR. We either make some minor changes incrementally & clean up some real problems or reduce them or we will be forced to make far more drastic changes. We cannot sustain the course & trend we are on. This is small potatotes. & I’d give a positive reminder to folks …. We’ve changed our regs for the worse for 20 years now…. More killing, more tags, less deer, less quality, reducing access to land, etc. Finally we have some small things that are the pendulum slowly swinging the other way. We have to make a few course corrections. I’d encourage folks to think about “the big picture, resource & future of hunting” over maybe unique or personal desires for more liberal regulations which allow a lot of things to happen we can’t sustain.
The last 20 years have been a DRAMATIC SHIFT. These bills are not dramatic or some huge change in what hunters are allowed to do. Bottom line: this will probably reduce the amount of bucks shot statewide in the thousands & the other bill will take >10m views off our state. Very noble accomplishments IMHO that will have far more winners than losers.
The ? Is this…. Can we sustain or justify an extra buck tag based on anyone owning 2 or 5 or 10 acres? The answer is NO in my strong opinion, based on: biology, our current hunting situation statewide & our current access issues. When we have cut the Harvest in HALF & the state’s #1 & #2 issues are: access to land to hunt & abundant game/quality experience (healthy balanced herd blended into that point) …. We MUST make some changes. When thousands of BUCK tags are being allocated for a 2 or 5 acre tract statewide & we are literally killing off opportunities for hunters to the point that they are becoming very loud & frustrated & quitting, etc - we have to make course corrections.
I’d personally like no 3rd buck tag PERIOD but we have to start somewhere. We cannot keep the direction we’ve been going & see the abuses of the segmented land further degrade experiences of other hunters. Let’s look at it from another POV…. If the law was 40 acre minimum TODAY to get a 3rd buck tag …. If we had a law being debated to drop it from 40 acre minimum down to 2 acres (or 5, whatever) …. What justification would we use for that change????
I am very well aware that ANY bill is gonna have some “upset parties” & there’s NOTHING that’s perfect. NOTHING. Including our current regs which are full of imperfections & problems- FULL. Our hunting dynamics have changed rapidly in the last 10-15 years & we must course correct. This stuff is MINOR….. “I can only shoot 2 bucks & 12 does”. It’s MINOR. We either make some minor changes incrementally & clean up some real problems or reduce them or we will be forced to make far more drastic changes. We cannot sustain the course & trend we are on. This is small potatotes. & I’d give a positive reminder to folks …. We’ve changed our regs for the worse for 20 years now…. More killing, more tags, less deer, less quality, reducing access to land, etc. Finally we have some small things that are the pendulum slowly swinging the other way. We have to make a few course corrections. I’d encourage folks to think about “the big picture, resource & future of hunting” over maybe unique or personal desires for more liberal regulations which allow a lot of things to happen we can’t sustain.
The last 20 years have been a DRAMATIC SHIFT. These bills are not dramatic or some huge change in what hunters are allowed to do. Bottom line: this will probably reduce the amount of bucks shot statewide in the thousands & the other bill will take >10m views off our state. Very noble accomplishments IMHO that will have far more winners than losers.