Irishlad, I just didn't like the way the article was written....to me it sounds as though the author is saying that bowhunters need to be doing things that are already being done....turning in poachers, shooting more doe, positively identifying targets. I'm sure we could shoot more doe! I just came across to me that the author is saying bowhunters look the other way when something goes wrong....

I realize the articel is written to portray a positive light on bowhunting, but when I read it I see a hidden image I guess. Maybe I'm just reading to deep and I should be taking it at face value.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Starting with the bow season opener on Saturday, it is time for all who hunt with bow and arrow to join their own defense. They can do this, not by demonstration and dissent, but by simply hunting responsibly and complying with the regulations that are now in place.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote> To me this sounds like bowhunters don't follow regs and don't hunt responsibly. Something to the tone of...straighten up or you'll be sorry.


<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Bowhunters will be the first to hunt under antler restrictions, and everyone will be watching. Any blunders that bowhunters make will be ammunition for those who would slash the season and would even set up a permit system for bowhunting bucks.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote> What does this mean....if I screw up and my buck's tines are only 3/4&quot; then someone(nameless) will be using that to shorten the season. What does that have anything to do with the length of the season?

That's how I'm reading many things in this article....I could be reading to deep, but I'll stick with my view and say still that it is rather negative. At least from my point of view.

BTW, I realize you weren't trying to accuse me of anything and I can see your view of the articel....I just see it differently.