Don’t put words in my mouth.
No, you couldn’t be more wrong. I care about wildlife, and if less hunters (because it’s perceived as hard, not because of loss of opportunity) are in the field or less hunter lethality helps wildlife, I’m all for it.
My care for wildlife mandates killing them in the most efficient manner possible that leads to the highest chance of recovery and consumption of the meat. I want maximum lethality once the shot is fired. For that reason, I limit my shots on animals to 300 yards. I’m building a 1000-yard range on my farm so I can find my real limitations and practice, but the odds of me ever shooting at a game animal more than 500-yards away are basically non-existent.
I don’t think a range restriction is very feasible or enforceable. But, if it must be done, I agree with you that it is best done via weapon restrictions.
The suggestions to limit seasons to straight wall, muzzleloader, archery, no optics, etc. all cut against my first point. Yes, they limit maximum range, but they also have lower chances of recovery and higher wounding rates.
Traditionally, in most states which have them, the reasons for restrictions to archery, muzzleloader, straight wall, shotgun, etc. have to do with visibility and safety (maximum range, not maximum effective range). They all originally stemmed from “know your target and what lies beyond it”, not attempts to limit lethality.
But, for all my opposition to weapon limitations, I would accept them if they were accompanied by a removal of cow and doe tags in any population that wasn’t meeting a very healthy recruitment metric.
I like to see the efficient harvesting of most of the superfluous males before winter. I don’t care if that means they don’t have great racks. Can’t eat antlers. And having more animals in the long run is far better for the herd than having more bucks or bulls make it to 8 years old. But, if a buck or bull gets wounded and goes off to rot, it’s far less harm (and possibly some good) to the population as a whole, than if a female does.
It really irritates me how many western states have complaints about recruitment and health of populations, but continue to allow harvesting of female animals. Because apparently hunters would flip out if they lost the opportunity to fill the freezer with a cow or doe.
Proper management of these resources is going to require that someone make the decision not to allow cow or doe tags. If they do that, then I would be in favor of lethality limitations.
____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”