Jim in a way you're like me....in that we subscribe to the common sense approach to natural selection in regards to a lot of things you mention. "Common sense" is a contradiction of terms, though.....and it makes sense to enact laws towards the few that affect the many. Who pays when the guy who chooses not to wear his seat belt is involved in an accident.? If we were all held responsible for our own actions.....I'd be in your corner. We're not held to that, though.

Your reasoning for thinking it was/is ASININE is because you think the state shouldn't be handling such issues. That brought on my next line of questioning.....which was....who is better than them to dictate the state's game laws for the states resources? I'm interested in your answer. I mentioned "anarchy"....because that's exactly what you're suggesting (and it isn't a dirty word.....it's just the definition of taking the power away from the government and making it 'by the poeple').

We have landowners who own large chunks of land.....that allow NO hunting. That means NO resources are taken from their lands, legally. Is this "proper" management? For every doe slaughterhouse......there's likely one of these havens.

The PGC (and all state's regulating agencies) have an unenviable task....and one that's gonna piss a lot of people off (obviously). But they're not managing for your land and your land, only. You can do that any way you see fit (in regards to NOT taking does.....which is obviously your choice). If you're unhappy about what your neighborsa re doing.......buy them out. What better way to control your own fate than to own the land that hold the resources......so much that what others do affects "your" world not?