Getting neighbors onboard with big buck mgmt

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

Just kill every critter that trespasses onto your property. If the LDWF liked them critters so much they would control em better. They get to tell you when and how you can kill stuff on your own land. That's a sack of BS to me. F them its my property. If they wana tell me when and what I can kill they need to get all of those animals off of my F'n property. I don't want them on my land.

Wildlife is a public property, whether on private land or not, so a public agency, like LDWF, has the right and responsibility to regulate wildlife and fisheries resources. If it were not for game agencies, we would not be hunting ducks, deer, or Turkey today. Couldn't catch a lot of the fish we do either.

Maybe we should just go back to the way feudal Europe was. You aren't a noble, you don't get to hunt anything. And if you do, the nobles will cut your head off. Or we can go back to the early 20th century when there were no regulations and almost all game animals were extirpated from the conterminous United States.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Wildlife is a public property, whether on private land or not, so a public agency, like LDWF, has the right and responsibility to regulate wildlife and fisheries resources. If it were not for game agencies, we would not be hunting ducks, deer, or Turkey today. Couldn't catch a lot of the fish we do either.

Maybe we should just go back to the way feudal Europe was. You aren't a noble, you don't get to hunt anything. And if you do, the nobles will cut your head off. Or we can go back to the early 20th century when there were no regulations and almost all game animals were extirpated from the conterminous United States.

Mr. Sense of Humor this is Mr. Smalls. I don't think you two have ever met .

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Wildlife is a public property, whether on private land or not, so a public agency, like LDWF, has the right and responsibility to regulate wildlife and fisheries resources. If it were not for game agencies, we would not be hunting ducks, deer, or Turkey today. Couldn't catch a lot of the fish we do either.

Yeah, we get all that, and we agree.

But these basic facts do not justify unlimited power to regulate everything shot out of a gun because some game animal might one day eat it or to regulate different land uses because they might change what eventually washes into a stream or to regulate CO2 emissions because they warm the earth and melt the ice polar bears need to survive.

The state-owned wildlife argument, taken to extremes, can be used to exert near-total control. There need to be reasonable limits on gov't exercise of power, and regulations that criminalize actions that are fundamental to liberty should be justified by hard data as necessary limitations on that liberty.

Fifteen pages of regulations on any one species is enough, don't you think?

[bgizzle]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

or to regulate CO2 emissions because they warm the earth and melt the ice polar bears need to survive.

LOL




"Go ahead, share your opinion! I won't cry"