Originally Posted by
fe2manz
It isn't that hunting isn't effective--the restrictions placed on hunting in urban areas IS not effective. that is why EVERYONE who is hunting is supplementing with sharpshooting--and if you are using money to sharpshoot, why spend it twice? THAT is why hunting is not adopted in these areas--if there was land enough for unmonitored or large-scale hunting it would work, but the plan for hunting that allows 14 hunters in 5 preserves will not work. Go to the meetings and look at the pans. All the sites are staffed by multiple paid people--those are the restrictions in the plans--it isn't sign-in, sigh-out take your animal home and be done with it hunting. Sorry guys, but that system of hunting will not work.
You can't do bounty hunting in the preserves, you can't go outside IDNR regs, you are restricted to larger buffer zones, fields of fire, partial season--so don't go spouting about educational deficiencies when you are ignorant of the issue at hand. this isn't about HUNTING---it is about deer management in urban areas and if ANYONE took the tiem to read the hundred or so pages the forest preserve put out, they would see that--and the costs are budgeted for--and it will not work. Call DuPage, Lake, McHenry (not a forest preserve, but a conservation district) and ask them why they don't hunt. It isn't because there is no interest. It isn't because they can't hunt. It is because that the restrictions of urban hunting as imposed by their governing bodies makes it not viable. Read all of that information and then preach the history of hunting effectiveness to someone who hasn't...with degrees in natural history of the Midwest, ecology, mammalogy and outdoor recreation, I am well-versed in what the books say--and since they have ruled out archery, and considering only very restrictive shotgun seasons, it won't work.
Even if you double the proposed numbers of hunters to 30--for 5 preserves--and they ALL get 3 deer each--you still have to come in and sharpshoot 300 or more deer--just this year. Not even taking into account that all versions of the plan would require between 15-24 staff for those 5 preserves during hunts--that is almost 1 staff member per hunter--these are all things people would know if they took the time to read all of the documents, not just the outlines and pamphlets that just list the high points. It is all available on their website.
Again, this is NOT about hunting, it is about highly regulated and monitored hunting in urban areas with shotguns--all of the people form every county around us are readily reached, and you can talk until you are blue in the face about what WILL work, but none of those workable solutions are on the table.
Seriously, are you joking? This is one of the most idiotic post that I have ever seen on any website ever. Maybe this counts as a post on your "I can count to 10 without my fingers" websites, but it doesn't count as one here.
I have to think the "no interest" part is the funniest thing I have seen in a LONG time. Do you do any research or just quote things written by other tree huggers? I can GAURENTEE you that if you have 30 spots and had a fee of $100 per spot you would have at least 10x that many people applying! I know Lake county would be AT LEAST that! I'd easily pay $300 for a 4 day gun hunt on an area that has never been hunted and is close to home. I know of at least 10 guys in Lake county that would apply and that is just poeple I know!
Your staffing numbers are way off too. You aren't in putting into the equation how many people it takes to staff these parks on a daily basis if there was no hunting going on. You make is seem like they are adding sooooo much more staff to these places when really it wouldn't be that many more because the parks would normally have these people working. Do you think they are flying in staff from all over for these hunts? No, these books you are quoting are ones that the activists wrote to make the hunt not happen, thankfully, people were smart enough to see through this BS.
Stop providing BS information that was done with no research and done by anti-hunting people. These papers you talk about were written with Bias points. Why don't you do some research and see how Mchenry county did the same exact thing and it has proven that they are saving thousands and thousands of dollars a year. Guess you missed that research?
Please stay off our site and we'll stay off your "I Love all the movies on Lifetime" site. Thank You