Quote:
Originally Posted by Top Dawg
The problem is making laws without any proof this stuff is as bad as they say. Slippery slope when you start making laws restricting sportsmen without sound scientific data to prove its a problem. Ie: 15 trout limit, triple tail regulations.
|
How bad does it have to be to warrant regulation? What is an acceptable percentage of the population lost to a disease, in your opinion?
Once this disease is here, there is very little chance of ever eradicating it.
I guess all of our game farms should be deregulated, and quarantines should be done away with when exotic game is imported to game farms. I mean, what's the point, right? It's just going to get here anyway, right?
Probably shouldn't have shot that Nilgai on Richard K Yancey, either. I mean, what harm could it really do?
I don't even see how this the same as the trout limit reduction. There was ZERO support for that. No evidence that it was needed. In fact, it was to the contrary.
There are plenty of reasons to at least attempt to keep this out of our herd. Chief among those is the fact that YOU CAN'T GET RID OF IT. It has the potential to exponentially increase in a herd, as shown in Wisconsin.
It is apparent that we will not see eye to eye on this. I've read enough of these discussions to know that some hunters in our state are not concerned with what this could do to the herd. It is only a matter of whether it will INCONVIENCE (NOT RESTRICT) them or not.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk