ORIGINAL: Germ
I do not think that state mandated A/Rs are right. I'll try my best to fight my fight with the people I hunt with on the places I hunt, but I do not think there should be a law...because ultimately it should be the choice of the individual to hunt the way they want, in this instance.
AR are intersting and i enjoy reading test data fromareas we have had in MI. I think they are not need by states DNR, let people make the choice. I am hunting a test AR place in KY 15'' spread restriction. I am curious to what I will see. I have scouted the WMU and it looked pretty good.
BUT
States mandate how many does or bucksI can shoot. In some area's does can not be hunted. Mandate fish of certain length. What is the difference? Is it the one more mandateyou do not like?
If you want to know I like OBR, to me it is the fairest method.
Sorry Germ,
I don't know what "OBR" means
As for the A/R and why I'm opposed to it, several reasons I guess. One is many of these same guys that I complain about are really just good ol "salt of the earth" country boys, who usually have several generations of hunters in one family hunting together. It's tradition for them. And when I run into them with their "truckload" I may shake my head and laugh. They will probably laugh as well. At any rate, even though I may question their thought process on shooting their 37th 4pt, I would never question their character or their general love of the outdoors.
So, even though I will always encourage them to change, I would never want the state to step in to "change their minds for them" If the state needs to make a change then I'd say cut back on the numbers but still, don't restrict the horns.
Another case would be for an adult"newbie" who may be on one of his first hunts. I'd like to see him/her be able to have as large a chance for success as possible.
Now, That being said, I think it would be just fine for the state to implement "trophy areas" on SOME public land, but not all.