.
I have read the entire thread and still can’t find a single person that has said that it should be a “totalitarian” ban that you keep saying people have
I don’t think there is a single person that has said it should be banned.
Ok let’s get on the same page. There have been a number of calls for the ban of sales. Quotes from the first page of the thread:
“I’ll also mimic others on this forum and say selling of antlers should fall under the same restrictions as wild game meat.”
What’s the law on selling game meat? Hard no
“In CA we cannot sell sheds. Honestly I think it’s reasonable that this should be applied in other states. I don’t think wildlife should be commercialized especially if it is having a negative effect.”
“I don’t sell sheds so I don’t care if there’s a ban on selling them or not”
“I think a ban on selling them and also closure of more sensitive wintering grounds is needed”
“ I think a ban on selling antlers and some specific shed seasons would be a more widely accepted solution.”
I consider a ban on the sale of antlers to be totalitarian. I see the implementation of rules directed at the entire country based on immediate needs of specific locations as totalitarian and overreacting
To clarify, points like “I’m not for a total ban but you can’t sell and you can pick them up while you’re hunting” I find to be half totalitarian (banning sales) and half ignorant (the rest of it)
And, as I’ve stated a number of times throughout the thread, I do see utility in something like a shed season to protect critical winter habitat in areas that actually need it, supported by scientific evidence. A nationwide rule on this is overreaching. A National date set is overreaching. My examples on differences between Arizona and Wyoming are meant to highlight this
What else can I clarify? And which parts of this seem unreasonable?