The first was typical...full of personal attacks and foolishness and I won't waste my time responding to it.
As for the other...
PAV
Quote
1. The original late antlerless season proposal was a replacement for...not an ADDITION to... general firearms days. Big difference.
2. I keep reading about the old 2010 data. Since the current regs ARE the concern...I would like to see how that 2010 data compares to the first few years of crossbows, added firearms days, and bundle licensing.
3. Statewide? So, if you are not seeing deer where you live, but a guy 60 miles away has plenty of deer....that's OK? I'll go out on a limb here and say...if it were not for ever increasing private deer management practices, the herd would be in much worse shape...statewide.
1. I've seen the failure of 1.0 passing (depending upon who is speaking) blamed on everything from a couple of people,the DNR, NRC, state politicians, the Governor and the local dog catcher... In reality, 1.0 met with resistance on many levels and ultimately failed.
Funny thing is...IMO, it may very well have passed if crossbow inclusion had been a part of it. But it wasn't and 2.0 took it's place.
As far as the late antlerless season goes....
Do I think that the season is necessary? Not in some areas, but herd reduction was going to happen and the late antlerless season was/is the tool for the DNR to help make it happen and to help manage the herd down the road without having to go through another 1.0/2.0 debacle.
One last point...1.0 was pushing for a shortened gun and muzzle loader season, but since the overwhelming bulk of the deer are killed in the first nine days of those seasons, one has to wonder if the difference in numbers would have been significant or not.
2. If you can find newer data broken down the way 2010's was, I would love to see it. Regardless, the late antlerless season harvest numbers are dropping. Fewer counties are involved in it this year and more counties have had their bonus antlerless permit numbers dropped. Is that enough to satisfy some? Obviously not, but the numbers are dropping.
3. There was/is and always will be pockets in this state that don't hold the deer people think they should. Some of that is due to habitat, the number of hunters, some of it is weather related and obviously there have been outbreaks of EHD. The other side of that coin is that there are places in this state that hold too many deer and whether it's because the habitat is better, it lies around protected areas like subdivisions or tracts being managed, or maybe hunting just isn't allowed...it's just the way it is and always has been.
Finally...I have said (and still think), that after herd reduction (and if archery hunters show the ability to consistently take a larger share of the harvest), the gun season will be altered.
And it very well may have happened a few years ago, if the first proposal had been more reasonable.......
