True or False...
06-30-2008, 02:44 PM
#21
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: True or False...
North Carolina -
NO SUNDAY HUNTING
Most municipalities do not allow hunting within the city limits
There's been a trend towards municipalities allowing hunting within the city limits, as of this past deer season (we now have a small handful allowing this - Bow only) in an urban archery scenario (extended season). This is another way to fight the population issue.
Allow Sunday hunting....
When the number of vehicle accidents (and insurance claims initiated by said) reach a certainpoint.....we're going to see the insurance company lobbyists itching to opening up hunting seasons/areas in record time. We just (obviously) haven't reached that point, here. Whether they open it up or not, though......rest assured...more deer will die (either via hunter or car).
We've already relaxed bag limits on does to the tune of.......Icould kill approx. 200/yr legally. I haven't seen the revised figures on the harvests ('06 v. '07) to know how well that is working out, though.
Just some random thoughts....
NO SUNDAY HUNTING
Most municipalities do not allow hunting within the city limits
There's been a trend towards municipalities allowing hunting within the city limits, as of this past deer season (we now have a small handful allowing this - Bow only) in an urban archery scenario (extended season). This is another way to fight the population issue.
Allow Sunday hunting....
When the number of vehicle accidents (and insurance claims initiated by said) reach a certainpoint.....we're going to see the insurance company lobbyists itching to opening up hunting seasons/areas in record time. We just (obviously) haven't reached that point, here. Whether they open it up or not, though......rest assured...more deer will die (either via hunter or car).
We've already relaxed bag limits on does to the tune of.......Icould kill approx. 200/yr legally. I haven't seen the revised figures on the harvests ('06 v. '07) to know how well that is working out, though.
Just some random thoughts....
06-30-2008, 02:46 PM
#22
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: IOWA
Posts: 400
RE: True or False...
ORIGINAL: quiksilver
See, I don't buy the population explosionargument one bit.
The only areas that will be overpopulated will be the areas with limited access (city suburbs and POSTED land). These are areas thatALREADY allow gun season, and are STILL overpopulated. It's not a question of weapon efficacy - the problem is land access and low hunter presence. Hunters just can't kill what they can't access.
If the population densities do get too high, you'll see more MV collisions and more willingness to welcome bowhunters into areas where the deer are actually becoming a major problem.
There are already tons of bow-only areas throughout the US and Canada, and none of them have any overpopulation problems that didn't predate the bow-only designation.
I can say with 100% confidence that my area has enough bowhunters to drive deer into extinction. While eliminating gun season would help get the deer densities back into their normal limits, it would certainly not put us at risk of being overrun by starving deer.
So what's the moral of this story? Are we saying that bow-only zones should only be implemented in areas of the country that are thick with bowhunters, so as to ensure that the deer populations don't explode?
See, I don't buy the population explosionargument one bit.
The only areas that will be overpopulated will be the areas with limited access (city suburbs and POSTED land). These are areas thatALREADY allow gun season, and are STILL overpopulated. It's not a question of weapon efficacy - the problem is land access and low hunter presence. Hunters just can't kill what they can't access.
If the population densities do get too high, you'll see more MV collisions and more willingness to welcome bowhunters into areas where the deer are actually becoming a major problem.
There are already tons of bow-only areas throughout the US and Canada, and none of them have any overpopulation problems that didn't predate the bow-only designation.
I can say with 100% confidence that my area has enough bowhunters to drive deer into extinction. While eliminating gun season would help get the deer densities back into their normal limits, it would certainly not put us at risk of being overrun by starving deer.
So what's the moral of this story? Are we saying that bow-only zones should only be implemented in areas of the country that are thick with bowhunters, so as to ensure that the deer populations don't explode?
....I don't see it coming anytime soon.
06-30-2008, 02:58 PM
#25
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,716
RE: True or False...
Ask a wisconsinite how well an Earn-a-Buck program works in keeping deer populations down. 
Sorry Fletch, but I don't buy it one bit. With liberal bag limits and seasons - and an Earn-A-Buck system as a LAST RESORT, there's NO reason that any area should ever become overpopulated, even if it is bow-only.
Iowa didn't get to be overpopulated because it was bow-only. It got to be overpopulated because nobody wanted to shoot any does. Gun or bow. Iowa isn't exactly thick with hunters, either. Under 400,000. That's peanuts.
Sorry Fletch, but I don't buy it one bit. With liberal bag limits and seasons - and an Earn-A-Buck system as a LAST RESORT, there's NO reason that any area should ever become overpopulated, even if it is bow-only.
Iowa didn't get to be overpopulated because it was bow-only. It got to be overpopulated because nobody wanted to shoot any does. Gun or bow. Iowa isn't exactly thick with hunters, either. Under 400,000. That's peanuts.
06-30-2008, 02:58 PM
#26
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: True or False...
If this thread does not point out the blatant failure of Americas public education systemnothing ever will.
This is America you are free to go buy your own land and use what ever you see fit, bows, guns or naked with a stick. But quit trying to ban others from doing the same.
This is America you are free to go buy your own land and use what ever you see fit, bows, guns or naked with a stick. But quit trying to ban others from doing the same.
06-30-2008, 03:13 PM
#30
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: True or False...
Quick's way of thinking is obviously popular (based on the poll). I'm interested in learning why it WOULDN'T work. I'm not in favor of all guns seasons being banned (nothing against gun hunting whatsoever)....but it would be interesting to know why it works in some areas.....and why (factually) it WOULDN'T work in others.
Why the need for the attack ad hominem? I'm being serious. Attacking your "opponent" in lieu of his point of view only shows the weakness in YOUR position.
My point exactly. The public school system is pathetic. You should feel like Gulliver on the beach at lilliput.
