# Gloom & Doom



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

It's only been one day... And I am sick of hearing all of the gloom & doom, nay sayers on here trash talking. Yeah, I'm upset that I didn't draw a tag... But the state didn't screw me. The state isn't out to get me. The state didn't say "I don't like this guy, so let's give his friends a tag, but not him." IT'S CALLED A DRAW for a reason... It's essentially a lottery. Get over it. 

Okay, I've said my peace.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

The rich people have a lottery? Oh wait, no they dont. They get to hunt every year with no waiting. Buy a tag and off they go.


-DallanC


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I am as happy and joyful as could be! My wife is going to be hunting a deer for the first time in her life. She drew a great tag too! 

Dallan does make a pretty darn good point, though. There is definitely some class discrimination in the way hunting tags are divvied out.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

I drew a Cache General season buck tag and a Cache South Late limited entry bull elk tag. I am happy that I drew but with 12 points It was almost a garrantee. I guess my wife and I got lucky that we pulled general season tags, but I think that the 29 units bring a lot of attention to what is decided in the Wildlife Board Meetings and leads our sportsmen in a progressive state toward more involvement. 

I dissagree with duckhunter... THERE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A DRAW... We have the resource available for over the counter tags for most units. The wildlife is managed by the Wildlife Board and Buck to doe ratios are determined by the public. We are backed into this corner by other people.


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

Rule number 1: Hunting is not a right. Once you accept that you move to rule number 2: hunting =$$.

The end.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

:lol: Anytime anyone manages for big horns it becomes a big money game that screws the average joe. 

I actually drew a ML tag this year, but I still think Utahs whole tag system is a joke!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

LOTs of tags still available!!!!

http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hu ... ggame.html


----------



## KennyC (Apr 28, 2010)

Although I don't care for the lotto system I have to agree that in this game money talks. There are hunts in this state I will only see in my dreams. I feel luck to have drawn a tag. Those that I feel real bad for are our kids. The deer, Elk, ect will be there but the ability for the common hunter is getting harder. I don't know that there is a group out there trying to prevent us from hunting but more so looking for the almighty dollar. I don't get wrapped around the axel about drawing and not drawing because waterfowl doesn't need tags yet and I enjoy hunting with my kids. Plus does it really matter who pulls the trigger? Not really the meat is still there and the rack is still the same and you can't forget the work. The only difference is the trigger. No reason to cry over spilled milk. Just wait and see what the % are this year vs. last year and that will be a tell tell sign of things to come and what units get more applications next year than this year.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> Rule number 1: Hunting is not a right.


*I believe with all of my heart that hunting is a right, given by God himself to all mankind.*



> Genesis 9:2-3
> And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.





> Leviticus 11:9
> These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.





> Leviticus 11:21-22
> Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth.





> Deuteronomy 22:6-7
> If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree, or on the ground, whether they be young ones, or eggs, and the dam sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou shalt not take the dam with the young: But thou shalt in any wise let the dam go, and take the young to thee; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days.





> GOD GAVE MAN DOMINION OVER ANIMALS
> Genesis 1:26-28
> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Awight, Dogger... I think you may have gone a little bit far on that one. God didn't intend for us to have vehicles or guns to have the ability to completely obliterate a species. Does it say anything in the bible about the Dodo Bird or the Carrier Pigeon (among MANY others) becoming extinct? Let's think for a second... I realize the deer population isn't near extinction (right now), so I'm going just as far fetched as your bible reference... But would you rather not draw a tag, or would you rather not be able to hunt cuz we've wiped out all of the deer?


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I see it like this guy-



> Extinction should not take place if men truly understand the command to be "caretakers" of the earth. We are to control the numbers of animals so disease and sickness do not kill them off; we are to use the animals for our needs; we are to control animals in a manner in which they are not harmful to humans; and finally we should protect them from over-killing and abuse. The problem lies in the fact that many do not understand this balance and tend to over-protect or under-protect animals. Animals were created for us to enjoy, so protecting a remnant for others to enjoy is also proper. Proverbs 12:10 tells us, "A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal..."


-Steve Chapman
http://www.christianbook.com/life-f...9781565078642/pd/5078640?event=AFF&p=1011693&


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> But would you rather not draw a tag, or would you rather not be able to hunt cuz we've wiped out all of the deer?


I wholeheartedly agree that animals need to be managed by mankind for survival of the herd. I simply think everyone should be given equal opportunity to draw a tag and that game numbers should be managed not for large horns, but herd health. Right now our system is a caste system that favors the wealthy and skews herd numbers to cater to trophy hunters.


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

It may not be P.C., but I completely agree with birddogger. (The fact that we have cars, guns, and traps and the rest of it is no surprise to God; and they are pretty insignificant compared to His creations.) We can use these things to the betterment of ourselves AND the animals or we can use them to annihilate and squander our stewardship.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

"and finally we should protect them from over-killing and abuse"

If you listen to (read, technically) all of the "gloom & doomers" here on this forum, they seem to think the state is out to sodomize the masses, with lack of any sort of care. I realize that's a strong way to put it, but seriously, that's how they're all coming across. EVERYONE IS GIVEN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY... It's called a draw. We all pay the same amount for the tag we are applying for. If you pay an extra $50 for a general deer tag, are you guaranteed one before me? No. Everyone has to pay for these tags. Yes, certain tags cost more money, based on the prestige of the area & particular animal involved. But I think we'll all agree that an Elk tag should cost less than a Buffalo, which both should be more than a deer. Does it suck for me that I don't make enough money to put in for a Moose tag every year? Of course. But maybe if I budgeted my money better & made a moose tag a priority for me, the story would be different. This is something that I've come to accept about my hunting life. I'm a deer & duck hunter most years (no deer tag this year) and an antelope hunter about 1 in 12 years. That's the beauty & pitfalls of hunting in Utah. I'll tell ya one thing though, I am a heck of a lot more appreciative of the antelope tag when I get it, cuz it doesn't happen every year. And I'll be MUCH more appreciative next year if I draw a deer tag, cuz I now have first hand knowledge of what it feels like to not draw one. (First year without a deer tag in what would've been 23 straight years if I'd drawn). I really CANNOT complain. I've harvested 18 deer in my life, I'm okay with missing a year.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Awight, Dogger... I think you may have gone a little bit far on that one. God didn't intend for us to have vehicles or guns to have the ability to completely obliterate a species. Does it say anything in the bible about the Dodo Bird or the Carrier Pigeon (among MANY others) becoming extinct? Let's think for a second... I realize the deer population isn't near extinction (right now), so I'm going just as far fetched as your bible reference... But would you rather not draw a tag, or would you rather not be able to hunt cuz we've wiped out all of the deer?


No, God didn't intend us to obliterate a species. That's why he said not to take the dam, just the young and why he said to replenish the earth as we subdue it. But He (or nature if you prefer) put us at the top of the food chain and gave us the ability to manage our food sources. We'd be wise to do it!


----------



## provider (Jan 17, 2011)

Duck,

IT IS TIME FOR GENERAL OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE, AND THAT IS NOT DOOM AND GLOOM. I guess we define "doom and gloom" differently. Most of the "doom and gloom" I hear is from trophy hunters. They say there are too many hunters, dates are too long, too many buck tags, too many doe tags, not enough habitat, too many houses. The excuse list goes on and on. The reality is they will never be happy and will always want to take away general opportunities. Ironcially, the general hunt and the herd health has not improved from all the new and improved regulations that trophy special intersts have pushed through under the pretenses of "helping the herd". 

Complaining about politics is not "doom and gloom." The trophy hunters ate the general hunters' lunch. Naturally there will be some push back. You may love option 2, but I don't. You can accept that option 2 is here to stay. I can say the majority of hunters do not want to exchange the general hunt for a limited entry hunt. The general hunters can push for more general opportunities just as SFW and trophy hunters pushed to limit them. It's not over. 

You can turn on the "good attitude" image now you have what you want and tell everyone else to follow, but this new system smacks of trophy management and sure feels an awful lot like limited entry across the board. I will not be silent even if you try and minimize me by saying its just "doom and gloom." Nice try, but I'm still here and I will likely be joining UWC soon. As the herd recovers I will be pushing hard to make sure opportunities grow with it. Don Peay thinks if the herd recovers, he willl have the right to claim victory and call the shots (translation - more general restrictions!!!-& never mind the long history of his failure to grow the herd) I say it is not his herd. IT IS TIME TO SEE GENERAL OPPORTUNITY INCREASE - AND THAT IS NOT DOOM AND GLOOM.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

hotspot said:


> hunting =$$.
> 
> The end.


http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/PubsTV ... isters.htm


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

provider said:


> Duck,
> 
> IT IS TIME FOR GENERAL OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE, AND THAT IS NOT DOOM AND GLOOM. I guess we define "doom and gloom" differently. Most of the "doom and gloom" I hear is from trophy hunters. They say there are too many hunters, dates are too long, too many buck tags, too many doe tags, not enough habitat, too many houses. The excuse list goes on and on. The reality is they will never be happy and will always want to take away general opportunities. Ironcially, the general hunt and the herd health has not improved from all the new and improved regulations that trophy special intersts have pushed through under the pretenses of "helping the herd".
> 
> ...


This is where I may have come across poorly... I hate the new system. Just like I hate... ABSOLUTELY HATE the fact that stick flingers get 4 months to harvest an animal, And I've been restricted to 3 days at one point to get mine. But as part of an activity that ultimately is a privelege and not a right... There are rules that need to be followed. And those rules change as time progresses. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. This one, I believe is for the worse.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Well, lots of ways of saying "I didn't draw and that sucks" which is fair enough. I am in that group.

But, I am not in the "its not fair" or "only rich people get to hunt" camps. I don't like the system, but I do believe it to be fair. Our problem is that we have more hunters, than we have game animals. Or at least, populations of game animals that can be sustained if all hunters got tags. I honestly think that if the herds (habitats) could sustain a tag for every single person that wants to hunt, DWR would sell as many tags as they could. It happens in other states that DO have game populations/habitats that can sustain that kind of hunting. But in Utah, that's not the case. So the system of applying and drawing is there. And like it or not, opportunities to apply for and draw tags are blind to any and all demographic factors - race, religion, income, sexual preference, or favorite football team. 

Can those with more money than me hunt more than me? Sure they can. If they hunt on CWMU or in other states. But they also can drive a nicer car than me, live in a bigger, nicer house, and go on better vacations. The fact that some rich guy can buy a CWMU tag to hunt on private lands has no impact on my ability to get a tag through the draw, nor on my enjoyment of the sport. The grapes on my plate are not sour enough to get upset over it.


----------



## alpinebowman (Sep 24, 2007)

Duck hunter archers only get to hunt 4 months on a tiny portion of the state. Feel free to pick up one of the remaining archery tags and join in the fun or quit complaining about it. Even with 4 months to hunt the archers success is still less then the rifle hunters.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Well, lots of ways of saying "I didn't draw and that sucks" which is fair enough. I am in that group.
> 
> But, I am not in the "its not fair" or "only rich people get to hunt" camps. I don't like the system, but I do believe it to be fair. Our problem is that we have more hunters, than we have game animals. Or at least, populations of game animals that can be sustained if all hunters got tags. I honestly think that if the herds (habitats) could sustain a tag for every single person that wants to hunt, DWR would sell as many tags as they could. It happens in other states that DO have game populations/habitats that can sustain that kind of hunting. But in Utah, that's not the case. So the system of applying and drawing is there. And like it or not, opportunities to apply for and draw tags are blind to any and all demographic factors - race, religion, income, sexual preference, or favorite football team.
> 
> Can those with more money than me hunt more than me? Sure they can. If they hunt on CWMU or in other states. But they also can drive a nicer car than me, live in a bigger, nicer house, and go on better vacations. The fact that some rich guy can buy a CWMU tag to hunt on private lands has no impact on my ability to get a tag through the draw, nor on my enjoyment of the sport. The grapes on my plate are not sour enough to get upset over it.


Wow...coming from Gary even.  Good post!


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

alpinebowman said:


> Duck hunter archers only get to hunt 4 months on a tiny portion of the state. Feel free to pick up one of the remaining archery tags and join in the fun or quit complaining about it. Even with 4 months to hunt the archers success is still less then the rifle hunters.


You missed my point. Although I hate the fact that you guys get those months, I don't generally openly cry about it. Yeah, I just did in this post, but it was strictly to show that there are exceptions to the hunting "game" that not everyone gets to play by. I will be the first to say that hunting with a rifle is generally FAR easier than bein' a stick flinger. I've thought about joining the fun of archery hunting, but the truth is... I enjoy eating meat better than tag soup...

GARY!!! You said it absolutely perfectly. You actually said exactly what I was thinking, but was way too lazy to type. lol Which is sad, cuz I've typed way more than I'd initially anticipated.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

I dislike the fact that Native American Indians have special hunting rights that others don't have. I dislike that they are considered sovereign in many areas of the law and are allowed to build their own casinos where the rest of us can't. I dislike that my wife has many privileges that I don't because she carries an Indian card as part of the Choctaw Tribe and I will never be allowed to have one.

It doesn't make me love my wife any less though. Same goes for hunting.


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

^^^^^

DING DING DING!!!


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

If people get offended for what I am about to say...TOO F'N BAD.

If you think everything in life has to be fair...... your dumber than even you know.

If you don't like rich people because they can buy anything (especially game tags)...... you should have worked smarter or stayed in school like your moma told you.

Rich people work very hard for what hey have and then they work even harder to maintain it. If you look at the bigger picture the numbers of tags that go to the public are waaaayyyy more than the one available for purchase. So play the game right and the odds are in your favor.

But in all reality we need to think about the real problem here. It's not rich vs poor or class warefare or any of that. Stop listening to that dumb idiot we have for a president. He's brainwashing you. 

The real problem has been management of our game herds based on social needs and wants instead of biology. That goes for habitat management as well. Then you have population growth. Add on to that outdoor recreation activities, etc. etc. etc.

This "rich people have it better" idea has got to go. All those of you that complain about rich people you are either socialists/communists or you know a lot of poor people that risk millions of dollars to create economic movement that in turns creates jobs and provides for livelyhoods. It's not the rich.... it just life. It's not fair, it never will be. Learn to live with it.

PS: Most rich people I know go and get things done... you should too!


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

^^^^^

DING DING DING


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Madhunter you may be my Huckleberry.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Madhunter you may be my Huckleberry.


I'll take that as a compliment!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

as you should......we see eye to eye on this.

I have been fortunate in my dealings and barely hunted for years because our business and family had to be the priority. Now if I want a tag bad enough I can buy one. Should I have to apologize to people because I worked very hard, made some good decisions, surrounded myself with others that wanted to be successful and had some good luck to boot? To those that answer yes.....tough luck. I won't do it. 

I have yet to buy a big game tag at the auction because I have chosen not too but I do not fault those that do and I in fact may some day. I also do not fault those that have enough land that it affords them the opportunity to sell a hunt that is on land that they own or control. I also don't whine about superstars getting millions for whatever they do.

There is far too much class envy in this world. Way too many people feel that they are entitled to something that they have done NOTHING for.

If a person doesn't like their reality they should CHANGE IT...... or take responsibility for what they don't have and not blame others. Next time something isn't good enough don't settle for what they have.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Skinner.... you sound like a good old american of times long gone.

I too have chosen my priorities and have given favor to preparing for the years to come. I chose not to buy auction tags because I am safeguarding the future of my family. In the mean time I will continue to run through the draw system and try to get what I can draw. The day will come soon enough when I will shift modes and enjoy what I have been working so hard for. I will spend money and time on purchased tags and will not apologize for having the ability to do so.

My grandfather would always say that we all have 24hrs in a day. The actions we choose to engage in during those hours make and define who we are and how we live. If the time we spend whining and complaining were spent changing what we do not like, this world would be a better place.

No tags for me this year so I will get an bull/spike tag, not sure which yet. That was my luck so I will make the best of it. - HAPPY HUNTING!!!


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> The fact that some rich guy can buy a CWMU tag to hunt on private lands has no impact on my ability to get a tag through the draw, nor on my enjoyment of the sport.


The CWMU is not what affects your ability to draw a tag. What really affects you is all the convention tags and all the tags given to special interest groups to be auctioned off for thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. The money is siphoned off and most of it never returns to help improve conditions for wildlife.

See, a rich guy can buy his way onto LE units every year. PUBLIC land, PUBLIC resources. Those tags are _stolen_ from the draw. Everyone who puts in for LE tags has a longer wait and has to spend more money in application fees so that the wealthy can be catered to. The point creep makes an LE elk tag a once-in-a-lifetime experience on a good unit for most folks. People just starting out will never draw. They'll just pour money into the pool. The fact is that the system is set up to allow the rich to STEAL from the poor. Directly.

The idea that the rich work harder than us working stiffs is utter horse ****. Some do. Some don't. Most inherited what they have. The fact that Greg Miller inherited the Jazz and hundreds of millions of dollars does not make him more knowledgeable about basketball or a better worker than the girls high school coach at Bear River High School, who happens to be a **** good coach and who works from dark to dark every day of the year. What makes Greg Miller more worthy to hunt public resources on public land than any person who reads this forum? Nothing. Nobody's complaining about him being rich. It's only when someone like that steals from the public pot that it's irksome. You don't like that, MadHunter, too F'N bad! You're still welcome at my campfire. 



> *The real problem has been management of our game herds based on social needs and wants instead of biology.* That goes for habitat management as well. Then you have population growth. Add on to that outdoor recreation activities, etc. etc. etc.


There's a whole lot of truth in that statement.


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

bullsnot said:


> hotspot said:
> 
> 
> > hunting =$$.
> ...


Thanks for the link. That's a good read.


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

BirdDogger said:


> > Rule number 1: Hunting is not a right.
> 
> 
> *I believe with all of my heart that hunting is a right, given by God himself to all mankind.*
> ...





> Leviticus 11:9
> These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.





> Leviticus 11:21-22
> Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth.





> Deuteronomy 22:6-7
> If a bird's nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree, or on the ground, whether they be young ones, or eggs, and the dam sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou shalt not take the dam with the young: But thou shalt in any wise let the dam go, and take the young to thee; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days.





> GOD GAVE MAN DOMINION OVER ANIMALS
> Genesis 1:26-28
> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.


[/quote:7dpk2zlh]

I do agree with you from the religious perspective. But in government that won't get you very far. As far as government goes, hunting is a privilege.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

> The CWMU is not what affects your ability to draw a tag. What really affects you is all the convention tags and all the tags given to special interest groups to be auctioned off for thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. The money is siphoned off and most of it never returns to help improve conditions for wildlife


While I agree with this in some cases. "Most" is a pretty broad statement.

I have a question...............Does "most" of the money that is generated in the public draw do anything improve conditions for wildlife? Think about it. Which system is more efficient?

Seriously.

If it were up to me, all of the tags would be by draw, and purely random, but I am not convinced that if that were the case it is the most efficient way to use the money that is generated. I would be willing to bet that a private entity could do the job more efficiently. The trouble lies in finding an entity that is truthful enough to do the job without become corrupt.

Man, by nature, is far better at finding contention than content.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

"This "rich people have it better" idea has got to go. All those of you that complain about rich people you are either socialists/communists or you know a lot of poor people that risk millions of dollars to create economic movement that in turns creates jobs and provides for livelyhoods. It's not the rich.... it just life. It's not fair, it never will be. Learn to live with it.


I know I shouldn't but what the hell. The above is a true lack of understanding of not only 
the political / American / Society but the state of wildlife management. News flash mega ditto heads / Hannity clones, If you are reading this, have electricity to run the computer you are reading this on, have water in your pipes and drive your Bailout Chevy or GM down the street 
you are a FREAKING SOCIALIST!!! All of this is provided to you by social venture. All of it.

You don't want to be a **** socialist go find a rock in Somalia. There you won't have to worry about evil government or paying for any one else. Get r done.

Being a good anti socialist you would absolutely despise the North American Model for managing wildlife. Wildlife is part of a public trust. We all own it ( **** socialists ) we all have as much right to it as the next guy regardless of being a man of means or not.

Do you understand what Pittman Robertson funds are and how they are paid out?? Do you understand why Utah does not have hunting laws like California is because of us piss broke scrubs like me?? Do you understand that the hunting lobby wouldn't be squat without everyday scrubs?? Do you know what the kings deer is?? Do you understand feudalism??

Fortunately Wildlife in the United States hasn't fallen to your Laissez-faire idiocy yet.
But with people like you that are happy to keep turning more and more of it over it won't be long.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> I have a question...............Does "most" of the money that is generated in the public draw do anything improve conditions for wildlife?


The reason given to justify the theft from the public pool was that the money would go to benefit wildlife. The public draw is for the public's benefit. You know, we the people...


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

I understand that but the fact remains, in my opinion anyhow, that "most" of the money does not hit the ground with the government running a public draw. I would like to see a study as to which system is more efficient. I hear a lot of people crying foul. I also hear a lot of people that are against big government all for having an inefficient government run the draw and keeping all of the tags in the pool. It's just conversation to me. Not an argument for or against. Until somebody can show me that the government gets a bigger percentage of funds to the ground I will be skeptical and by the way I am not "anti-goverment" at all. I am pro efficiency.

I am a bit of a gambler at heart so I like the idea of a completely random public draw. Just knowing how the government is ran though I doubt that capitalism is not the best solution given the off chance that honest people could run it.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

BirdDogger said:


> > But would you rather not draw a tag, or would you rather not be able to hunt cuz we've wiped out all of the deer?
> 
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree that animals need to be managed by mankind for survival of the herd. I simply think everyone should be given equal opportunity to draw a tag and that game numbers should be managed not for large horns, but herd health. Right now our system is a caste system that favors the wealthy and skews herd numbers to cater to trophy hunters.


Excellent post!!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wileywapati said:


> "This "rich people have it better" idea has got to go. All those of you that complain about rich people you are either socialists/communists or you know a lot of poor people that risk millions of dollars to create economic movement that in turns creates jobs and provides for livelyhoods. It's not the rich.... it just life. It's not fair, it never will be. Learn to live with it.
> 
> I know I shouldn't but what the hell. The above is a true lack of understanding of not only
> the political / American / Society but the state of wildlife management. News flash mega ditto heads / Hannity clones, If you are reading this, have electricity to run the computer you are reading this on, have water in your pipes and drive your Bailout Chevy or GM down the street
> ...


One of your most nonsensical posts ever, and that is saying something! Your last paragraph shows a complete lack of understanding on what Laissez-Faire is......FYI, it is NOT about "turning more and more over", it is about KEEPING more and more as individuals instead of allowing the government to TAKE more and more! Your inane assertion that having electricity is an example of being socialist........how can you make such an assertion and be over the age of 6? :roll:


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

"FYI, it is NOT about "turning more and more over", it is about KEEPING more and more as individuals instead of allowing the government to TAKE more and more!"

I told you I knew I shouldn't but I did. Good to see I coaxed you out of your hole.


So by your definition socialism = collective ownership. Liberty = private ownership.

You would rather privatize every aspect of American life. In essence this is exactly what we have done here in the State. Big Game is controlled by the groups that market landowner and conservation permits. If you think our herds are not managed to maximize these dollars you are out of your Sanpete County freaking mind.

Who ended Statewide Archery?? A private Org. Who got us to 30 units?? 1 family and a private org. Who ended AR-301?? A private org.

How can you proclaim private / individual ownership of EVERYTHING while condemning EVERYTHING that living in a society has provided for you?? I'll never get it.

If you wish to be 100% self sufficient don't use a **** thing that didn't come from your direct labor.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

-O|o- 



:O•-:


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

BirdDogger said:


> -O|o-
> 
> :O•-:


No kidding. +1,000

This has got to be one of the worse B&M threads ever.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Well, this thread ended up being a complete waste of my time.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wileywapati said:


> So by your definition socialism = collective ownership. Liberty = private ownership.


Crazy idea....so crazy the Founders were willing to die for it! The single issue that made America more prosperous and more free than any/ALL other societies is PRIVATE PROPERTY! That this escapes you highlights one of the MANY reasons public education is a failed and deeply flawed system!!



wileywapati said:


> If you wish to be 100% self sufficient don't use a **** thing that didn't come from your direct labor.


As soon as the government stops taking from me I will gladly do so!! Until then, you are being intellectually dishonest to imply I should allow the government to STEAL from me, and I not try and recover a SMALL portion of it. But, I am curious what you think I 'use' that I don't pay for. -Ov-


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Thats funny, I'm pretty sure that the British aristocracy did condone owning private property, many of them claimed ownership of parts of the American colonies, as did the colonists, it was not illegal. The British were not against private property ownership, but they were for the aristocratic, and plutocratic rule and taxation of said property. Under said aristocratic and plutocratic rule, the few, the elite, the land owners, the wealth, controlled(read owned) the goverment. What the founders so rightfully saw differently, and fought for(My family helped start the revolution, **** agitators!) was a democraticaly elected representative Republic, where in the people _*collectively*_ owned and ran the goverment, and had a say in the rule and taxation of themselves. Every individual, regardless of land ownership, had an equal say(OK so some of that would actually come later, **** mormons and womens sufferage.) Government, by the people, for the people. By your definitions, wall street and a huge chunk of the US free market system, would be considered socialist.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> Thats funny, I'm pretty sure that the British aristocracy did condone owning private property, many of them claimed ownership of parts of the American colonies, as did the colonists, it was not illegal. The British were not against private property ownership, but they were for the aristocratic, and plutocratic rule and taxation of said property. Under said aristocratic and plutocratic rule, the few, the elite, the land owners, the wealth, controlled(read owned) the goverment. What the founders so rightfully saw differently, and fought for(My family helped start the revolution, **** agitators!) was a democraticaly elected representative Republic, where in the people _*collectively*_ owned and ran the goverment, and had a say in the rule and taxation of themselves. Every individual, regardless of land ownership, had an equal say(OK so some of that would actually come later, **** mormons and womens sufferage.) Government, by the people, for the people. By your definitions, wall street and a huge chunk of the US free market system, would be considered socialist.


Pure rubbish! The 'common man' was NOT allowed to own property, they were serfs, in other word....SLAVES! Other nations, before and since, have installed democracies and republics, but they failed to include the ability of ALL citizens to own property! There was NOTHING collective about the Founding of this nation.

And yes, Wall Street is indeed socialist, or at the very least state capitalism. It is most certainly NOT a free market by any stretch! In fact, I contend there is very little, if any, segments of the US economy that are even mostly market driven. Socialism and crony capitalism have taken over every sector I can think of. If there is one, please share! There is a reason Wall Street and the banks so heavily bank-roll BOTH political parties....it isn't to keep the economy 'free', that is for **** sure!!


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Pro

The "common man" was able to own property over 400 years ago in Plymouth, the streets still bear my ancestors(common men) names. That was over 150 years before the revolution. To be clear, we are talking about the Americas, correct? In the early days we did have indentured servantry, but once released those men could own land. African slaves could not own land, is that what you are referring to? Women? Native Americans could own land, as eveidenced by the purchasing of some of that land, by both the US goverment, and the earliest settlers, from Native Americans.


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

*"There was NOTHING collective about the Founding of this nation."*

So the ONE Pilgrim got on his boat, came over here, handled the Native Americans
decided he didn't want to pay taxes any more and had a one man Boston Tea Party??

Dude I'm not sure what crops you are cultivating right now but you apparently need to quit smoking the stuff.

Look I'll agree with you about the power of Private Property, to a certain point. 
What you can't wrap your mind around is the fact that a collective effort made it possible 
for you to speak English and not Japanese or German. Not grandpa Hansen standing out in
his field with his trusty 30-30. A collective effort keeps criminals from stealing, trespassing or burning your private property. A collective effort brought your ancestors across the plain to where you call home. Every bit of this you would label as evil collectivism or socialism.

You also stop at the supposed Nirvana that would be complete privatization without progressing to the latter steps of what inevitably becomes Feudalism. Want to talk about 
Privatizing fish and game animals does?? How about CWD, Whirling disease and to a certain extent brucellosis and blue tongue.

It's easy to deride society and all that it provides as evil socialism. While you are sitting under the umbrella of security it provides.

Like I've always said try this crap out in Somalia or some other Un-Socialist country and let me know how the warlords treat ya.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Somalia" "Plutocrats" ?? I'm thinking of moving this to the Political Section.


Uh.....wait a minute, there is no Political Section.



Are Plutocrats from Pluto?


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

"Are Plutocrats from Pluto?" No, they just seem disconencted like they are from outerspace.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> "Are Plutocrats from Pluto?" No, they just seem disconencted like they are from outerspace.


Thanks Lonetree.

And I have to ask too, what is a "boad"?


----------



## Duckholla (Sep 24, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> If people get offended for what I am about to say...TOO F'N BAD.
> 
> If you think everything in life has to be fair...... your dumber than even you know.
> 
> ...


Valid points, and I would add to your comments the following:

It matters not whether a dollar comes from a rich man or a poor man, the dollar's value remains the same. If you want to hunt bad enough, those tags that are, "reserved for the rich" do not discriminate. You can buy them just as easy as the next guy, you just have to get busy, and get the money. But it's still beside the point. Game management is the issue, not the cost of a few tags.


----------



## Longfeather (Nov 27, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> It's only been one day... And I am sick of hearing all of the gloom & doom, nay sayers on here trash talking. Yeah, I'm upset that I didn't draw a tag... But the state didn't screw me. The state isn't out to get me. The state didn't say "I don't like this guy, so let's give his friends a tag, but not him." IT'S CALLED A DRAW for a reason... It's essentially a lottery. Get over it.
> 
> Okay, I've said my peace.


I'm sick of all the complainers complaining about the complainers......


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Goob

"Boad" is how I mispelled bode, too many TBIs. Comprehension is still excellent, but the spellen aint none so good.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> Goob
> 
> "Boad" is how I mispelled bode, too many TBIs. Comprehension is still excellent, but the spellen aint none so good.


14st 25dd5n'

Whoops, I mean "just kiddin"

I left my number lock on.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

Goob

Maybe I should have typed slower, its my spelling, not yours.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Lonetree said:


> Goob
> 
> Maybe I should have typed slower, its my spelling, not yours.


That would help, I don't read very fast.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I thought Pluto was Mickey Mouse's dog? I am so confused here. So confused.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> I thought Pluto was Mickey Mouse's dog? I am so confused here. So confused.


Uh...watch it, I may have to move this thread to "Hunting Dogs"


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

It would be "Other Animals" because Mickey is a Mouse. Sheesh.
[attachment=0:7m10g8jl]Mickey Bear.jpg[/attachment:7m10g8jl]


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> It would be "Other Animals" because Mickey is a Mouse. Sheesh.
> [attachment=0:3rr5xq8a]Mickey Bear.jpg[/attachment:3rr5xq8a]


Really, lets get a ruling from TEX O BOB. :lol:


----------

