When a discussion is concluded with "right to my opinion" means that someone has run out of facts. Right now contraception is not economically feasible, but when it is it will be chosen over sharpshooters and over bow hunters in and near cities.

LOL Germ, these ar eopen to residents only I believe. MOTOWN says the one he went on was like shooting monkeys in a bbl. Probably shooting to answer your question.

I disagree. We will not see eye to eye on this Slim, we didn't in the politically correct thread, and we are at it again. Same issues ands stances on both of our sides. You fear losing hunting rights to antis and contraceptives, and I say that the state and taxpayers would rather make money then spend it. There is already a plan that is working, not costing any tax dollars, and bringing billions of dollars to the state and the economy; it is called HUNTING. I am doneposting onthis thread.

just like the political thread you don't understand or read my remarks.
My remarks state that cities are chosing sharpshooters and contraception over bow hunters.
I do not think that the contraception will take the place of hunting. But ever town that hires
sharpshooters proves that your opinion about "money talks" is just plain wrong.

I guess you could also say that everytime they hire someone to kill deer then someone else has lost the right
to hunt.

Before you see this, More days to hunt will be opened, more area will open up with rules like if it's not posted you can bow hunt and limits will go way up.

I right now can shoot how many I want without checking them in first. More and more places are opening up. It's only a matter of time the rest follows. Contraceptives will never be implemented.

I would like to offer a very good read to all of you. It really will open some of your opinion and eyes. It's called Heart and Blood Living with Deer in America by Richard Nelson. I promise, you will enjoy it.

What some of you are arguing has taken place in areas like Angle Island near Los Angelas and Fire Island I believe NY right? I'm rereading it now. It's truly eye opening through views of the author and hunting living through the eyes of Politics, Anti's, Biologist and Non hunters. If you get a chance, read it.

you could be right, but it is going to take an organized movement from a ton of hunters to get this moving in the right direction. There are a bunch of opportunities we just need to take them. We(hunters) need to push on every issue. We should be present to oppose all sharpshooters and be vocal about our stance. If we are not vocal and choose not to get involved then our opportunities will shrink

The urban hunt regulations that I am familiar with (Cedar Rapids and Coralville) a hunter has to shoot 10 does before getting an anysex tag. With those restricitions, I'd rather spend the rut hunting somewhere else. Luckily the doe total carries over to the next season (I think).

I have heard that when you start whacking does, they wise up plenty fast and it can be just as challenging of a rural hunt. So I'm leaning towards hunting over shooting.

Field, where you live it's that way, where I live, it is not. I want you guys to picture the liberal states, already using sharpshooters AND not extending bag limits and season dates. Now, down the road, hunting as we know it may, and I repeat, may become illegal. Ok, so now you have thousands of peeps that want to hunt from NY,MA, etc. Guess what will happen? The states that allow hunting as we know it now will have rich people buying up land in YOUR state so they can sponsor out of towners that can't hunt in their state.

Dan, it is the private corporations that will be making the money and feeding the state with hunting revenue ...

I know this is a stretch, but do you really think that it can't happen?

Just a thought ...

Good preaching Slim! A hearty AMEN to that!