I have counted the times I stated my postition, which is not your oversimplification. I have stated 16 times on this bbs alone, I wanted to expand the opportunity for firearms hunters. I have NEVER stated that rifle season should include the rut and be 2.5 months long. Only an alternating possibility of hunting close to the rut, when there is a large expanding deer population. I am not anti-bowhunting, as a matter of fact I joined in signing petitions against HSUS position on banning bowhunting. I fully support a hunter's right to participate regardless of equipment choice. An affront to hunting of one is an affront to all.

Resident Kansas Firearms hunters have 8 times the number of resident archery hunters in 10 to 12 days of season. Additionally, ALL four of the NWRs are CLOSED to centerfire, additional PUBLIC land is closed to centerfire, and leasing has removed even more available land from resident firearms hunters. This is NOT a different issue, it is about hunter access and hunter participation. I support (really) your efforts, and I would add to endorse state wide archery permits for residents IF AND ONLY IF there is an address of the issues faced by resident firearms hunters. I and many others have a problem with resident archery hunters complaints about loosing access, when our group is effected to an even larger degree in terms of land accessibility and hunter density levels within the season. KDWP has not even considered it at all. ANd as for "the way we did it for the last 40 years..." well, Kansas culture, social structure, etc., has changed, and thus the management principals must change.

As for units for management, either all are units or not. The KBA position is for management principals, if you are going to manage by units then by all means do so. We need all the points of data.

I think I have shown you that is not what I have been saying, and I will try to use less facts and more rationlaizations.