>EFA-- Every group has their own
>opinion and proposal as to
>what should or shouldn't be
>included in regulations. Some of
>them do get included in
>final regs etc. But, I
>think it is na?ve to
>think that any of us
>would be okay with going
>back to the old days
>where all decisions, were made
>soley by the wildlife managers.
>The very reason we have
>many of the conservation groups,
>is because the PUBLIC wanted
>some say in the decisions
>that were made, and that
>precipitated folks getting together, so
>as an organized group their
>voice would have more leverage
>with the big game managers.
>The fact that some
>groups have benefitted financially from
>this-- was and will continue
>to be a the reality.
>You should know this by
>your own experience with UWC.
>It takes money to get
>things done. I'm certainly not
>always comfortable with the influence
>that some groups have but
>its the reality of the
>system that needs to be
>in place to raise the
>kind of funding needed to
>accomplish much of the beneficial
>wildlife projects that we hopefully
>will all benefit from as
>hunters.
>Could you explain what you mean
>by "...deals with those who
>make the rules." Is there
>some sort of underhanded dealings
>going on? If there is,
>then I would be the
>first to stand up against
>it. If you're referring to
>the Expo thing-- its been
>beat to death-- I haven't
>seen anything that says it
>was done illegally-- maybe ethically
>tainted in some way-- but
>I can't see anything illegal
>yet.
>There will always be a balancing
>act of opportunity vs quality.
>That debate could go on
>forever, hopefully there will continue
>to be "opportunity" for those
>who are looking for big
>mature animals and "opportunity" for
>those who just want to
>see a buck of any
>size. For me, its always
>a treat to see a
>big mature buck. I may
>be wrong but those bucks
>represent healthy strong herds in
>the future because maybe they
>will pass on the genetic
>traits that will make it
>possible for our deer herds
>to survive the next thing
>nature may throw at them
>and survive. I know-- even
>yearling bucks can pass those
>genetic traits on, but natures
>process is set up so
>that the biggest and strongest
>will pass those traits on
>to their offspring-- The does
>are the ones that choose
>the sire. According to Geist-
>they will always choose the
>buck that is the strongest
>and biggest and with the
>biggest headgear.If the only thing
>around is a spike, it
>becomes ,-- perpuation of the
>species 101.
Thanks for a sensible and calm response. I, and I think others, appreciate it.
First, I may be nieve in some areas and on some issues, but certainly not enough to think we could (or should) go back to the point where ALL decisions were made solely by the DWR wildlife managers and I've NEVER proposed we should. In fact, it would be foolish of me if I did, because I wouldn't have a say either. Please don't read things into my post that aren't there.
Second, I think it's great that there are sportsmens' wildlife conservation organizations around. I would never have it otherwise, and yes, they do a great deal of work that benefits all kinds of sportsmen. While there may be some, even in UWC, that think we have no other option and would shut some of them down, I think we can still work together on most projects and proposals. But where we differ, I'm willing to say so and I'm not intimidated by the labeling, name calling, insults, negative references to my family or lifestyle or attempts to shut me up. Say or call me what they will, I know who I am and I figure that the problem is theirs, not mine. I also know that the labeling, name calling, insults, etc. are nothing more than an attempt to compensate for a weak position. If the position were strong enough to stand on its own, those emotional arrows wouldn't be needed.
Third, Yes, I suppose there will always be a balancing act, but right now it's more toxic than it needs to be, in part, because the trophy crowd isn't happy with the current General Unit buck to doe ratios, even though ALL units are at or above the Mule Deer Plan. And this isn't the first time the balance has gone beyond necessity and/or reason. Overcrowding, loss of statewide archery, increasing LE hunts, shortened seasons and antler point restrictions are all policies designed to reduce opportunity and have nothing to do with increasing or maintaining populations. The balance has shifted drastically toward commercialization and the pursuit of trophies and people are noticing that they are being dis-infranchised and are on the outside looking in. They don't like what they see!
Fourth, Not all deals are secret or private, but that doesn't mean they still aren't deals. However, I have no idea, and neither do you, how many unpublicized local napkin meetings have been held. Additionally, SFW, BGF, and others openly have hired lobbyists to get laws passed by states and feds and those lobbyists aren't confined to making deals in open, public meetings. A lot of lobbying goes on in hallways, offices and restaurants.
Fifth, As for the breeding of does, you, like many others who prefer trophies, assume that all the mature/older bucks will be killed and none will be left to breed does, but that isn't true. It's amazing who comes out of the hidey holes and shows up when the does get hot! There won't likely be a case where the only thing around is a spike. But even if there is, that spike has viable genes, DNA, and sperm adequate for the job. And the does will end up pregnant. Sure it's fun to see mature bucks, but let's not go so far as to change the management of the unit from opportunities to trophies.
Yes, let's keep the balance, but let's keep it proportional to the numbers of ALL hunting types, even those who don't show up at the meetings.
