quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
No argument there, but when/where is the line drawn and people stop believing that the rest of the members of the site are jerks, simply because they view things differently?

Some people can disagree gracefully, and some cannot do so without being a real pube. The owner of this site acts like a pube on other threads, so what do you expect out of the rest?

That is a credible point, but as the owner he sets the rules.

We don't have to agree with them, just like we do not have to participate on the site.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
The fine for shooting game should never be more then the cost of a license.

Coming from a person who claims some kind of LEO background this is a ridiculous statement.
Aren't fines and penalties (consequences)part of the deterrent?
If there are no consequences for game violations or crimes of any kind what is to deter people from committing those crimes?
We know that moral guilt is not effective.
I can't believe what a turd soup this thread turned into...
I personally have very strong feelings and beliefs about criminal activity whether or not it involves game violations is besides the point.

The law is what the law is. Break it and pay the price. It is that simple.

We can disagree with the penalty just like we can disagree with the amount of speeding fines, parking tickets, highway tolls and the length of prison sentences. Guess what? It changes nothing. The penalty is what the law requires.

quote:

Aren't fines and penalties (consequences)part of the deterrent?
If there are no consequences for game violations or crimes of any kind what is to deter people from committing those crimes?
We know that moral guilt is not effective.

PLUS 1 on the above.

In states that give out crop damage permits and pay for crop damage.

Those critters have a negative value.

They should be begging people to come and shoot them for free.

I agree with the side that states we should not be having special seasons for bow or muzzleloaders.

The purpose of hunting seasons and bag limits is to control populations. Why allowing someone's choice of take to give special consideration seems wrong. I have often listened to bow hunters tell me how much harder a bow kill is and how it's more of a challenge. I grant that, but then you reverse that by insisting that they have seasons when no one else is hunting, etc. My feeling is that most bow hunters are trophy hunting, and if they wanted just to get venison, it is easier to do that in bow season before the gun seasons even with a bow than during the regular seasons with a rifle.

I also have some question about restricting hunting to bow only for safety reasons in developed areas... given that they usually a special proficiency test for the hunters... and when push comes to shove, the DNR or it's contractors come in and shoot them... why not just allow a firearm hunter to pass a special test and post a bond and allow them to hunt these areas?

Kinda off the subject, but I feel there should be special seasons favoring the bow hunters and black powder hunters. HOWEVER, I feel the they should be limited to the use of traditional style weapons. Nowadays you have bows and black power weapons that look like something you'd see on Star trek. They are obsessed with the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit of the law.

So let us look at this from another view point, just for the fun of it.

How many of us really want to see "HUNTING" survive into the future, regardless of method, and how many of us want to restrict hunting to ONLY the methods we find acceptable?

There was a man in my neighborhood who poached an Elk and was caught. He had been investigated in the past but there wasn't enough evidence to get him. This time that wasn't the case.

He had bought a brand new K5 blazer and was towing his 3 wheelers.
The Game wardens confiscated everything he had used in the commision of the crime. They took it all.

He hadn't even made a payment on the Blazer is what my dad said.
The guy wasn't allowed to hunt for 5 years and I think he may have even did some time in Jail.

To me this is what is needed to deter Thieves. some on here think it should be a slap on the wrist and I can't agree with that at all.

Here in Nevada it is a lottery draw system. There are people than there are animals.
I have waited years to draw a deer tag, my antelope tag, have yet to draw an Elk tag here in Nevada.

If some jerk comes along and shoots a game animal it takes away from someone who is playing by the rules.
If they want to steal then make them wish they never did. That's how I feel about it.

"I feel the they should be limited to the use of traditional style weapons. Nowadays you have bows and black power weapons that look like something you'd see on Star trek. They are obsessed with the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit of the law."

I see your point but don't agree.

A modern in-line muzzleloader has exactly the same limitations as a traditional style arm. Old or new, the low chamber pressure and large, heavy caliber projectile give a rainbow-like trajectory and not even a scope can insure a long range hit. The hunter still gets only one shot at an animal. It doesn't matter if you drop a few pellets down the bore or measure powder out of a powder hour, no critter is going to wait for you to reload.

A bow is still a human-powered weapon. Its effectiveness is limited to the strength and skill of the user. Any increase in velocity comes at the cost of ease of use. For example, a high letoff makes it easier to hold at full draw but it's much harder to get past the letoff point. The progressive draw of a recurve bow is much more natural.

The practical, effective range of a modern bow, in the hands of an average hunter, under average conditions, is not that much greater than a compound bow made decades ago. Some can (and do) shoot further but ~50 yards is still the practical limit for most hunters. There will never be a 100 yard vertical bow for the same reason there will never be a 100 mph. bicycle - people aren't getting any stronger.

Yes, modern equipment does look like something from the prop department of a si-fi movie but that's because it's being pitched to a younger crowd that favors the "eXtreme" look and edgy graphics. That doesn't make it any more (or less) effective than more traditional styling. We do want to attract the next generation, don't we?

The law is the law is kind of a BS excuse, but it is the law, made by people whether it makes sense or not.

I basically agree with LHeym, you got a tag, shouldn't really matter what weapon is used. Don't need umpteen special seasons with special weapons with umpteen rules and laws. But, I do believe the states issue all these tags and then make all these laws so that not all will be able to fill their tag. In short, it is a money making business, or rather a racket.

Yes, we need laws to combat poaching and protect resources, but common sense laws and not a 300 page rule book nowadays. But, as we all know, common sense is a rare word nowadays.

Look at traffic laws, if all were locked up for speeding the roads would be empty for me, lol.

quote:

Originally posted by Dom:
The law is the law is kind of a BS excuse, but it is the law, made by people whether it makes sense or not.

I basically agree with LHeym, you got a tag, shouldn't really matter what weapon is used. Don't need umpteen special seasons with special weapons with umpteen rules and laws. But, I do believe the states issue all these tags and then make all these laws so that not all will be able to fill their tag. In short, it is a money making business, or rather a racket.

Yes, we need laws to combat poaching and protect resources, but common sense laws and not a 300 page rule book nowadays. But, as we all know, common sense is a rare word nowadays.

Look at traffic laws, if all were locked up for speeding the roads would be empty for me, lol.

If there weren't so many dishonest people there would be no need for laws at all. That said, I agree that many of the game laws are ridiculous and overly complex.

quote:

But, I do believe the states issue all these tags and then make all these laws so that not all will be able to fill their tag. In short, it is a money making business, or rather a racket.

I have to disagree with that assessment. During my 50 year hunting career, I have hunted in 7 states including Texas and 2 Canadian Provinces.

I have never found the rules and regulations that complicated and the times I did not kill something it was not because of the Law per se, but because I either messed up a stalk or simply did not see a legal animal.

On a hunt for Coues deer in Arizona I saw plenty of does, and because I am not a Trophy Hunter, had I saw a legal buck, which at that time I believe only had to have 6 inch or longer antlers to be legal, I would have shot it, I just did not see one.

Everyone really needs to stop and think about what shape our game populations would be in, if it had not been for the implementation of game laws.

Something that has come to mind over the years is fine's for breaking the law are not intended to stop the individual from doing it again but rather to raise revenue. If fine's were intended to stop people then only excessive fine's will work, just not on the rich!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

But, I do believe the states issue all these tags and then make all these laws so that not all will be able to fill their tag. In short, it is a money making business, or rather a racket.

I have to disagree with that assessment. During my 50 year hunting career, I have hunted in 7 states including Texas and 2 Canadian Provinces.

I have never found the rules and regulations that complicated and the times I did not kill something it was not because of the Law per se, but because I either messed up a stalk or simply did not see a legal animal.

On a hunt for Coues deer in Arizona I saw plenty of does, and because I am not a Trophy Hunter, had I saw a legal buck, which at that time I believe only had to have 6 inch or longer antlers to be legal, I would have shot it, I just did not see one.

Everyone really needs to stop and think about what shape our game populations would be in, if it had not been for the implementation of game laws.

Never hunted in Oregon have you?

No Sir, I have never hunted Oregon, but I am willing to bet I could do so and not have one bit of problem abiding by their game laws.

Some folks just do not think there should be rules and regulations concerning hunting and fishing and they do not realize that without those laws and the ones in effect before them, there would be no game or fish to pursue.

On the other hand, America could have went the way of Britain and Europe where only the Royalty could hunt or fish and the commoners were prohibited from either.

If a person does not like or agree with the game and fish laws their state has put into effect petition the state to change them or move to another state that has laws a person can agree with.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
No Sir, I have never hunted Oregon, but I am willing to bet I could do so and not have one bit of problem abiding by their game laws.

Some folks just do not think there should be rules and regulations concerning hunting and fishing and they do not realize that without those laws and the ones in effect before them, there would be no game or fish to pursue.

On the other hand, America could have went the way of Britain and Europe where only the Royalty could hunt or fish and the commoners were prohibited from either.

If a person does not like or agree with the game and fish laws their state has put into effect petition the state to change them or move to another state that has laws a person can agree with.

No, most folks would agree that there should be rules, regulations, and laws. They just feel that the laws should not/do not apply to them.

Here in Texas, I feel we are very lucky, as Texas Parks and Wildlife requests input from sportsmen/citizens on changes being considered to Game Laws and other subjects that may/can or will affect Texans in participating in various outdoor activities.

TP&W does this both OnLine and with Public Meetings held in various locations around the state.

Do I like and support EVERYTHING TP&W comes out with, NO, but at least I have the ability to make my opinions known to those involved in the decision making process.

To me a white tail deer is barely worth the cost of the resident hunting license in most states.. I don't care how big the antlers are..

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Here in Texas, I feel we are very lucky, as Texas Parks and Wildlife requests input from sportsmen/citizens on changes being considered to Game Laws and other subjects that may/can or will affect Texans in participating in various outdoor activities.

TP&W does this both OnLine and with Public Meetings held in various locations around the state.

Do I like and support EVERYTHING TP&W comes out with, NO, but at least I have the ability to make my opinions known to those involved in the decision making process.

OK Crazyhorse, your entire argument basically settles around Texas, 95% privately owned. Noway can compare to states with a lot of public land hunting opportunities. Those states sell umpteen hundreds of thousands deer licenses, of which a portion will be filled. They don't sell them with the intention of all filling their tags.

Anyway, laws are laws as they say, most choose to follow them.

Getting back to the original post, the guy poached a deer, got caught and payed a fine that was and should be a deterrent to doing it again. Too bad other places don't have fines as good as this guy had to pay.

Poaching is a crime and should be. It steals from those who abide by the law, there is no valid excuse for it.

If you don't like special seasons or weapon specific ones - fine. Many of use do and have fought hard to get them. You always have the choice to hunt elsewhere if a particular area or season doesn't meet your needs.

quote:

OK Crazyhorse, your entire argument basically settles around Texas, 95% privately owned.

No, the "Argument" deals with "hunters" not liking hunting regulations that they believe are discriminatory.

After all, it is called HUNTING for a reason, merely buying a license does not guarantee that any or every "Hunter" will be successful.

This is merely another of those subjects that point out WHY hunters, as a group, simply cannot provide a United Front to combat the Anti Hunting forces.

I do not believe I am wrong in stating that every hunter, regardless of the state or country they hunt in, find laws/regulations that they do not agree with concerning hunting in that location, that is just human nature. All of us, as a species find various rules/regulations = Laws in our daily lives we do not agree with, but how many of us really would like to see hunting or fishing be unregulated, everyone just goes out and does as they please?

The claim was that my "Argument basically settles around Texas", as I have stated elsewhere, I have hunted in 6 other states and two Canadian Provinces and had no problems.

If a person does not like or see the need for a particular set of regulations or special seasons, go to that states Game & Fish commission and get the rules changed.

Just a hint, you start trying to take away a "Special" season from one group, do not be surprised when that group retaliates and tries to do the same to you.