Larry, you suggest that documented population level impacts are the only ones we should care about as wildlife managers or sportsmen. AmarilloMike, you seem to agree. Well, wait a second here….

Sportsmen all over this nation have accepted a whole range of regulations which have nothing to do with preventing population level impacts. Things like seasonal restrictions, daily bag limits, night hunting prohibitions, sink box bans, gauge or equipment restrictions, trophy zones… the list could go on and on. Why shouldn’t I be able to shoot a buck with a crossbow at midnight with a spotlight in its face? Is there any more biological impact than shooting a buck at dawn with a 30-30? Why shouldn’t I have a season limit for quail (say, 100 a year) which I can shoot all in one day if I’m that good, instead of only six or eight or ten a day? Why can’t I shoot all the cock pheasants I want any day during the non-breeding season (this is generally agreed to have no biological impact, because pheasants are polygamous, with one rooster capable of inseminating fifty or more hens), particularly on my private land?

Haven’t sportsmen already accepted, in fact suggested, a whole bunch of restrictions of their behavior and equipment for something going on 100 years in the U.S.? Restrictions which have nothing to do with population level impacts, but in fact addressing some higher level of behavior or responsibility afield?