If its for population control, then you have a Crop Damage Permit and then you are exempt from the "seasons". But really, you don't want to shoot a pregnant doe in mid-May.
I don't love the kill, I love the hunt. The destination is not nearly as important to me as the journey. I have not killed a buck in at least 6 years, but I do take a doe or two each year for the meat and because my friend asks me to on his farm. I just haven't come across buck lately that I feel like using my tag on. I tell anybody that asks I bowhunt because I despise rifle season and I love the challenge of archery. Plus the weather/seasons are generally much better which is more enjoyable to me. That's a two sided coin. Yes bows are allowed for safety concerns, however the populations in those parks need controlled so bowhunting is definitely used as a management tool in that case. Good topic.
My assertion is that nature takes care of itself;our attempts to manage are unnecessary. WHEN we interfere and unbalance the system then YES absolutely, conservation is needed which is generally the case given global population, greed and reliance on finite resources. Nature is a perfect system of checks and balances, disease, weakness, genetic deformity, predation etc. are all natural "herd" management strategies. Populations will be just fine without human interference. T
Depending upon the area but in certain circumstances I believe it is. There is a doe reduction season where I hunt in residential areas where the deer are way overpopulated & destroy homeowners property. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm having a hard time getting my head around what you just wrote. In one line you reassert your previous assertion and in the next you pretty much concede the entire point. The portion I placed in bold is an absolute and a given, when it comes to our deer, we have without a doubt interfered with and thrown the system out of balance by the necessity of agriculture and de-predation. An unavoidable result is a boom in deer population and density. Our ideas of "necessary" are a long ways apart, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Nature is also far from perfect, history is full of instances where animals became specialized and then completely died out because of it. Nature seeks to fill a void and to equalize the system, true but the problem is that it's solutions aren't always perfect as to our wants and wishes. Human intervention is not technically necessary, nature will make some sort of adjustment...I'd just prefer it to be predictable and to my liking. I'd prefer to keep populations in check and even rather than a mass die off from a rampant disease outbreak.
Conservation? To clarify then... when out of balance conservation is necessary... For some unknown reason we (humans) feel compelled to control nature, when systems function well without humanity. In a consumption based global economy, it is highly likely that consumption will continue and increase if possible. This tendency has and will occur at rates that surpass the "natural order" or "balance". Therefore conservation is necessary as stated. Conservation at its base means to reduce, to conserve, to preserve and cut back accordingly. I am not sure how hunting plays into this premise? While a definition of conservation includes management, or wise use, it is highly debatable whether these terms should be included thereby causing hunting as a "herd management" tool to be contrary to actual conservation. "Nature is also far from perfect, history is full of instances where animals became specialized and then completely died out because of it. Nature seeks to fill a void and to equalize the system, true but the problem is that it's solutions aren't always perfect as to our wants and wishes." Who are we to decide what is perfect or not when it comes to natural order? Because a given species becomes extinct does not mean the system is not perfect. It is the imperfection of the species, the inability to adapt that lead to its demise in the "perfect system". Agreed, nature does fill gaps but as you say these equalizations do not always align with our "wants and wishes".. so what? Why should our wants and wishes matter, and more importantly when are they going to stop mattering so much? This ideology of anthropocentrism is causing irreversible environmental problems on a VERY small piece of rock that supports life as we know it. We need to put out "home" first in decision making opportunities. T
99.9% of all species are extinct and there have been five mass extinctions recorded with a sixth underway. I think we are capable of making subtle changes, however I do not feel we have the power that "mother nature" does.
Bowhunting is most definitely sport. All the shows on TV...sport. Tracking a single buck all season long with trail cameras...sport. Targeting the biggest possible buck...sport. Why is that hard to admit?
I agree. I hear the excuse that they only do I for the meat. I call bs on that. We would be better off to work when we would be hunting and buy it at the store.
I get more out of hunting than meat, but I would not hunt an animal if I did not use the meat or fur. I think parts of hunting is "sport like" and other aspects of hunting is not. I don't think you can generalize hunting as it means for everyone involved.
I certainly dont eat the coyotes, raccoons or woodchucks that i kill. Or the mice i kill in traps...birds that get hit by my car...ect. We as hunters dont have to justify it to the anti-hunters as something "nice" and "useful'. This is America, we have the right to pursue game animals. End of story.
Really it's all about revenue for the states or tags would be free,it's a resource plain and simple and it just happens to be awesome. Just like every thing in life follow the money.
Okay, what I got from that was, we need conservation but conservation may not include population management of game species like deer. Sorry but the DNR and the state conservation agencies disagree with you, they actively practice population control or more accurately population management through hunting. Probably because they are intellectually honest enough to just admit it rather than to try to argue against the obvious. Who are we to decide what is perfect? We are humanity, the dominant species on the planet. The species that has developed to the point that we can manipulate our environments to our liking....that's who we are to decide. You know, the species that invented air conditioning to make summers more tolerable, heated homes to make the winters more tolerable, agriculture to make food supplies more dependable, vehicular travel to make more efficient use of our time rather than walking, electricity to grow civilization, etc...etc... We get it, you're mad at humanity for being egocentric, you're a champion of environmentalism...gd those coal power plants right...Jeeze...whatevs man...Godbless you and have a good day.
We only have an archery season here on Long Island, well a short shotgun season after December 31st) too many people and dwellings around for rifle.
We have an obligation as stewards of God's creation to manage the critters that he has given us rule over, but that is not why I hunt and I would never use population control as an argument. I hunt because I enjoy the sport, the meat is incredible, and the buck mount on my living room wall is nice to look at. I have no desire to argue with the ignorant. I will let the foolish be foolish, until it affects my hunting right, I don't much care. I also believe sensible hunting regulations are good for making sure we have a future for this sport we call bowhunting.
