Quote
Originally posted by BREW...:
Quote
Originally posted by delaney:
[b] Why does it seem that these discussions almost always end up a weapons issue? It seems that at times the "deer" herd becomes secondary to weapons. The big picture, in my opinion, should be about how many deer are being harvested, what the average harvest per hunter is, how to limit harvest when needed and what the intended number of deer per habitat mile is targeted by the DNR. Forget the weapon issue for a while because at some point, hunting is hunting. I'm not really sure that the vast majority of hunters even acknowledge or take into any considerations this thing of "management". I believe the problem is hunter density, unwillingness to not pull the trigger or release the bow, or the vast lack of the majority of those who hunt deer to really give a crap about the deer herd except when they are wanting to shoot one.

The existing hunting organizations have become vastly ineffective in influencing anything because the game has changed with how politics and management is handled. The will have a good opportunity to see if hunters can have an influence based upon the number of those who hunt deer becoming socially engaged. Now, again, no organization is going to satisfy everyone and if they get caught up in a weapons focus instead of looking at the bigger issue of harvest and herd size, they too will get drawn down into the abyss of being discounted by the agency. There are more then a few in the DNR that often have felt that we are at a point where most who are engaged year round are more focus on the weapon use issue then the status of the deer herd itself.
Dave... are you talking about "IWDHM" on FB when you say "emerging social media organization" ??? confused

If you are BEWARE ....If anyone doesn't tow there line so to say you are banned from even comment within the group!!! That's what we need Hmmm??? confused [/b]
For now, that new entity is engaging via social media. Certainly they might ban folks that don't agree but maybe that isn't all bad because at some point the arguments become pointless and detract from accomplishing anything. If they can make it work, regardless of whether I agree with all their views, good for them. I can go on and on as to what I believe the IDHA and the IBA have done in the past and good that it has produced. That said, there needs to be new energy and new involvement. The IDHA and the IBA has a lot of baggage with many deer hunters, be it warranted or not. So, there needs to be other organizations with other views and goals. My hope would be that all organizations put the deer herd first and foremost. We need more involvement, not less. And as I have said before, no organization is all right or all wrong and no organization can be all things to all people.


"Fishing is like a one night stand, unless you're fly fishing, then you've encountered the romance of your life"