To me, my paramount desire is to encourage the ethical, effective, 'humane', legal harvesting of game in order to effect conservation and proper management of our wildlife.
The truth is most government conservation policy makers, loath hunters, and at best begrudgingly accept that we hunters are the solution to their game management problems (both in being their source of revenue, and the implemented solution).
I consider seasons, licensing, and regulations to be both tools to effect our goal of resource management, and at the same time they are barriers of entry for new hunters and hunters in general.
Thus the governing rules of any hunting/season should be simple and effective or they are net barriers to our goal.
So when forming my perspective on rule changes, I always hope to first weigh the proposed rule against these two questions
1: will this help conservation
2: will this reduce of barriers of entry/participation?
Or as a bottom line: Will it foster more people humanly harvesting the correct number of the correct animals?
If the answer is yes, no matter how it affects me personally (or my business), I support it as policy.
I see nothing here that prevents purist's (whatever that means to you individually) from hunting how they want.... more over I see it reducing a barrier of entry and probably producing the harvesting more of the right game at the right time. To me this is a net positive and should be supported.
I feel the same about the Michigan straight wall cartridge use during muzzle loader season (in the lower part of the state). Though here, I'd like to see Michigan add a muzzleloader only season 1Nov-14 Nov (stuck right in-between archery and gun season).
I'm convinced that adding that liberty to our hunting regs would promote more of the right animals taken at the right time, and foster more participation by both experienced and novice hunters.
Yours,
Tom
