Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Duck Hunters Forum' started by CAF, Mar 31, 2021.
that was my point.
In response to Kennedy.
I agree with you 100%.
The sarcasm was lost in type.
See responses in bold.
In Iowa, a tagging system was used for non-resident pheasant hunters in the 70's and (I believe) 80's. As far as I know, Sask still uses leg tags for huns and sharpies. Most (if not all) states reuire big game tagging. The system is in no way unprecedented.
Why was that? Were the birds being over-harvested? Are the ducks?
That is a limit. 8 birds. Can't be re-filled, like in your system.
Limit is one. Proves who, and when it was taken. Comparing big game to waterfowl is absurd.
Last I checked we had tagging laws on the books now that next to nobody follows and the state wardens don’t even know about.
We also have laws about keeping birds separate, but based on photos here and on that face page the piles are all the rage. “Who shot that mallard with the band?” “...we drew for it and Steve got it, cause we all shot...”
Just like early goose seasons with extra limits. I know many a guy who never shot a goose after the early season ended. At least that’s what the packages in his freezer said. 3-daily limits of 5 per license holder in the house is a lot more than the regular season limits of 3.
I would also like to know where these magic harvest numbers come from? Were you surveyed? Because I wasn’t. Did my birds get counted? You don’t even know how many days I hunted let alone my harvest data. You can’t get an honest answer out of anyone in real numbers anyways.
I don’t know, maybe they are, my understanding is they’re not but maybe it’s a state thing. I was just responding to the guy who said something about duck welfare.
Then every anti who happens to enjoy walking his dog on the local state or federal refuge will start to think he gets a vote, and their first initiative will be to ban hunting.
There are more non-hunters than hunters; always have been. There have not always been so many anti-hunters, but their ranks are growing. Politics is downstream from culture, and policy is downstream from politics. Recruitment and retention of hunters, or at the very least improving the image of hunters and hunting in the eyes of non-hunters is the only thing standing between us and a culture that elects politicians who ban hunting. If I’ve got to bump into an extra hunter or two in the field to promote a hunting positive culture in this country that’s worth it, because the fast approaching alternative is no hunting for anyone.
Probably the same guys and gals that do now - federal and state game wardens.
More food for thought.
I like this thread.........
I'm not so sure that it would be an enforcement nightmare. Most bird tags that I have seen have a serial number that ties back to the license/stamp.
Would there be some cheating? Sure. Would it exceed the amount that exists now? Doubt it.
As to harvest data, a tagging system would certainly add more certainty to the overall "harvest estimates".
Anywho - at the end of the day, the best "recruitment tools" for duck hunting are birds in the sky and the opportunity to shoot the same. If the "casual hunter" can't see and shoot at ducks - they will be a casual hunter no more, and their dollars (as well as their vote on hunting issues) will disappear. The word "habitat" has been drummed into our heads for decades is "habitat ", and every public and private waterfowl related organization says that our duck related habitat is woefully inadequate. Makes sense to me that those who take the most should be more than willing to pay for the taking - whch brings me right back to the coffee shop analogy, where you pay for each cup of Joe.