2017 Game Code proposal - make your voices heard

[JHbowhunter]

This is like saying “if they were about money they would charge $3000/season. There is a limit before people stop paying. What NJ is doing is very clever, making you feel like you pay less because you pay in $28 dollar installments. The seasons are design to extract from you as much money as possible. There is no other reason behind it. It would be much easier to have one or two seasons with the same bag limits we have now in all individual seasons combined but to collect the same money the fees would be scary!   

 

 

Excellent point, there are two forces at work and it's easy to argue both sides of it. 1) the auto insurance industry and farmers (those not selling deer corn) want all the deer killed. There is a lobby involved. 2) The permit system is geared heavily toward revenue.  3) There are areas we WANT them to charge more - like non-residents, with the hope it would discourage the freezer filler tours from the states with low deer densities like Vermont, as well as a pipe dream that it would possibly lower our permit fees.    

 

All that being said.  2 flexible buck tags a year, and a quota on does per year. If they still want to carve it up by permit by permit by permit by weapon by season etc - FINE.  Just give us flexible tags/ quotas, and let US decide how when and where we use them. A dead deer is a dead deer - doesn't matter what time of year we killed it. PERIOD. END. STOP

Edited April 12, 2017 by JHbowhunter

[Lunatic]

Excellent point, there are two forces at work and it's easy to argue both sides of it. 1) the auto insurance industry and farmers (those not selling deer corn) want all the deer killed. There is a lobby involved. 2) The permit system is geared heavily toward revenue.  3) There are areas we WANT them to charge more - like non-residents, with the hope it would discourage the freezer filler tours from the stats with low deer densities like Vermont, as well as a pipe dream that it would possibly lower our permit fees.    

 

All that being said.  2 flexible buck tags a year, and a quota on does per year. If they still want to carve it up by permit by permit by permit by weapon by season etc - FINE.  Just give us flexible tags/ quotas, and let US decide how when and where we use them. A dead deer is a dead deer - doesn't matter what time of year we killed it. PERIOD. END. STOP

 

I couldn't agree more. 2 to 3 bucks fore the entire season, however and whenever you want to take them, but a button buck should also be a buck. Like you said there is no difference how old is the buck you kill. The only thing that matters is the actual numbers we take.   

[JHbowhunter]

I couldn't agree more. 2 to 3 bucks fore the entire season, however and whenever you want to take them, but a button buck should also be a buck. Like you said there is no difference how old is the buck you kill. The only thing that matters is the actual numbers we take.   

 

agree except you lost me at 3 bucks... 2 please!

[Lunatic]

agree except you lost me at 3 bucks... 2 please!

Ok , 2.5 :-)

[BenedictGomez]

Maybe not "as much as possible" but they certainly are managing revenue instead of deer.

 

Obviously they need to manage revenue, as any entity does.  But that's NOT what is being claimed by the dimwits.  The dimwits claim that it's all about maximizing revenue and nothing about managing the deer herd.  This is obviously false.

 

I am maybe dumb to you but you asked to put pencil to paper and show you. I did and all you could do is again make the same statement without anything of substance or even an attempt to address my response to your post. Maybe you are too lazy?:-) 

=

 

No, actually you didnt.   The fact that you dont understand this.....well......

 

 

If F&G was really into it to make money one thing you'd see is a fee for every doe tag.

 

 

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding......... We have a winner.   Not to mention about 2001 other things they could do to increase revenue that they're not doing now.   Like charging more, MUCH MORE, for out of state licenses as was mentioned by several other folks.

 

To repeat, people who say NJF&G is only interested in maximizing money and doesntt care about the biological health of the deer herd are either lazy and have never even thought about this, or are stupid people. 

[Lunatic]

For the guy who is so quick with name calling because you disagree, you sure completely lack the ability to back up any of your statements with anything of substance. There isn’t anything you presented to support your claim and yet we are lazy, dumb, stupid. It is easy to make bold statements but not so easy, at least in your case, to back your statement with anything.

Sure you look very intelligent making these statements:

"Get out a piece of paper and a pencil, and assuming you're not an idiot, do some math, and you'll quickly see why what you said is false."

 

"I'll say again, anyone who thinks NJF&G is trying to make as much money as possible on deer hunting rather than managing the deer herd is either: 

1) Too lazy to actually spend 5 minutes thinking about this mathematically

2) Dumb"

But for some reason when I showed you some numbers proving my point  you completely ignored it and then when I ask you twice already to show us the math, all you could do is make the same statement without ANYTHING to back it up. I am not having a conversation with an adult. It feels like I am talking to a seven year old with limited vocabulary and poor reading comprehension. I ask you for some data, you know the mathematical explanation, and all you can do is say again: "your are wrong because you don’t understand or you are stupid". That’s some argument……if you are 7 years old:-)

 

 

 

 

Obviously they need to manage revenue, as any entity does.  But that's NOT what is being claimed by the dimwits.  The dimwits claim that it's all about maximizing revenue and nothing about managing the deer herd.  This is obviously false.

 

 

No, actually you didnt.   The fact that you dont understand this.....well......

 

 

 

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding......... We have a winner.   Not to mention about 2001 other things they could do to increase revenue that they're not doing now.   Like charging more, MUCH MORE, for out of state licenses as was mentioned by several other folks.

 

To repeat, people who say NJF&G is only interested in maximizing money and doesntt care about the biological health of the deer herd are either lazy and have never even thought about this, or are stupid people. 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Lunatic

[BenedictGomez]

But for some reason when I showed you some numbers proving my point  you completely ignored it and then when I ask you twice already to show us the math, all you could do is make the same statement without ANYTHING to back it up. I am not having a conversation with an adult.

 

WOW.  You sure are very upset about this.

 

You didn't show any "numbers" to prove your point so there's nothing to ignore.   And others in this thread have done a very good job pointing out why your "argument" is so nonsensical and foolish.   

 

Lastly, this isnt the first time this dopey subject has been discussed, use the Search function.

[P&Y BUCK]

Getting rid of EAB is the dumbest idea ever... I always thought that was a good rule for zones that started early... I think you should have to EAB even after the first of October...

[P&Y BUCK]

2 bucks a year max is a great idea!!!

[P&Y BUCK]

I also think there should be antler restrictions... to many button heads and spikes get offed not cool in my book...

[P&Y BUCK]

4 points or better for first buck harvest

6 points or better for second harvest

[Lunatic]

WOW.  You sure are very upset about this.

 

You didn't show any "numbers" to prove your point so there's nothing to ignore.   And others in this thread have done a very good job pointing out why your "argument" is so nonsensical and foolish.   

 

Lastly, this isnt the first time this dopey subject has been discussed, use the Search function.

 

 

Still not one number, not one piece of information from you to support your claim

 

There is nothing you contributed to this discussion with exception of telling us we don’t understand or we are stupid, lazy or dumb. And again where is this mathematical approach you so proudly announced? It was to prove how wrong I am and so far despite of several posts you didn’t give us one single number. Is it coming or was this just a stamen without anything in mind, hoping no one would call you on it. Well I did and all we received from you in reply was: “you don’t understand or you are dumb”:-)

 

You say I didn’t show you how this is about money and not about deer. I gave you a specific reply with examples regarding money. It is obvious to anyone following this awkward discussion you are not capable of countering anything…Just statements    :

 

I believe all of the idiotic seasons and bag limits we have for deer hunting alone,  are only here to make you feel better when spending the kind of money we are spending for , fall bow, permit bow, winter bow, muzzy, permit shotgun and of course the license. Right there with buck tags, and only one zone you are talking about $340. They take it from you in $28 dollar increments because people would scream about $340. This has nothing to do with deer management.

 

Now I will get out my pencil and paper to give you a specific example. Why do you think they allow one buck in each season? Because if they had a limit of two or three buck for the entire season/yeart they would lose tons of money. Most guys would get their two bucks during the archery season and they would no longer buy buck tags for the remaining season.  In my case, I hunt in two zones, they would lose $224.

Do you still believe  they do poor job managing the money and great job managing deer population. (use that pencil!!) 

And BTW the decisions they make points to one of two possible conclusions: They are managing the money or they are stupid.

 Then look at turkey seasons and tell me they are designed for one thing and that is taking as much of our money as possible.

[Lunatic]

I also think there should be antler restrictions... to many button heads and spikes get offed not cool in my book...

 

 

4 points or better for first buck harvest

6 points or better for second harvest

 

This part I disagree with you on. The only thing working as far as increasing the numbers of bucks is not killing so many bucks. Antler restriction will only thin out genetically superior bucks and let the lesser bucks go on.

 

two bucks/ year and a button buck is a buck. Whatever makes you happy,.

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Lunatic

[P&Y BUCK]

This part I disagree with you on. The only thing working as far as increasing the numbers of bucks is not killing so many bucks. Antler restriction will only thin out genetically superior bucks and let the lesser bucks go on.

 

two bucks/ year and a button buck is a buck. Whatever makes you happy,.

 

I do see your point... it seems to work in a lot of other states... I don't see why it wouldn't work here...

[Lunatic]

I do see your point... it seems to work in a lot of other states... I don't see why it wouldn't work here...

 

 

Its a theory so who knows who is right  but I am not sure the antler restriction works so good in places like PA. However; I think we can agree its the numbers killed or not killed that matter. I personally have no problem with someone taking a button buck if it makes him happy. A buck is a buck and if we limit the overall numbers then the numbers of young bucks killed will be reduced as well.