[sakogreywolf]

I debated as to whether or not to bother, but any way;

CORRECTION to post #460... I meant to quote the following:

Originally Posted by jryley

pudel you made a couple statements there basically outlining my arguement. I have yet to see one guy on here saying to put archery on draw to boost rifle harvest. Again, dividing the lines. What guys like myself
Have said is put them both, or close both seasons entirely to get the populations back up. Youre putting a spin on my tale that has nothing to do with what ive said.

'some zones exceed the 15% - so what'. Complete garbage statement. I would say my zone is one of those 'few'. Which effects me more than it effects you...and frankly my zone is what i have the most interest in. If the 15% is exceeded then i feel my thoughts are valid.

If you throw one empty coffee cup out your window does
It really have an effect on the environment? No. But we all do our part and help spread the message that something needs to be done. Pudel youre doing the exact same thing that most bow hunters i know do, regardless as to whether their/our bow brethren are actually at fault, and that is
Point fingers. Youre convuluding a very simple arguement
In my eyes, as you seem to have missed my
Point......shut
It down in my zone, if not province wide, for bow, primitive, landowner, rifle, slingshot, dynamite etc etc etc etc to feed the greater cause. How anyone can take that statement and somewhat agree, as long as its not archery season blows my
Mind and furthers many rifle only guys view that bow hunters seem to have an idea of self entitlement. In my eyes harvest numbers are a complete gong show arguement. 1. Theyll never be accurate. 2. 15% harvest means jack all. If only 5% mule are taken of that 15% but those 5% were trophy
Animals taken in a struggling zone then thats an issue. Its not hard to comprehend! As ive stated numerous times on
This thread....if that LIMITED bow harvest is eliminated, along with the excessive rifle harvest, we are much further along to not only restoring effective numbers of mule deer, but quality animals as well than if we are solely to focus on only the rifle harvest. I refer back to the analogy i gave of the two individuals putting money aside for a downpayment. It holds true, as our goal should not be whats going to work in the short term, but whats the BEST equity plan for the longterm viability of our game species.

If i need to dumb it down here it is. Mule deer numbers are down in my zone. Abismal actually. Do we act as a community and make it better? Or do we segregate select individuals and leave it up to them? The answer is pretty clear.

Pudel, your statements are clear and concise (as i am sure you already know) and mirror my thoughts on the matter.