ORIGINAL: BowHuntingFool
ORIGINAL: tmontgo1
This sounds harsh but i dont think its really a factor of what the people want at all. The regulation of put there for the reason, to boost the deer population, if that goal has been met and the population is now sustainable then it should be taken off and guns should be allowed. If the quota isnt met and the herd still isnt large enough then it should stay bow only. Those variables should be the only thing that decide this!!!!!
ORIGINAL: bigcountry
ORIGINAL: madvilledoc
You make it sound as if there are a few bowhunters that want to keep the vast majority of everyone else from hunting these areas with a gun. The exact opposite is true. If it was left entirely up the local residents, we would not have a problem.
Not true at all. You make it sound like locals only want bow. I know several people from Dingess, Gilbert, Pineville, Matewanarea that wants to gun hunt.
What kind of mindset is this?? If there is a deer population problem there, why is ANYBODY hunting there period?????
As madville said in his post, the regulation was put in during the seventies when the population was wiped out, like most of the rest of the state in the early last century. The goal was to get a sustainable herd back, and that is a conservation mindset.