A5Gunner wrote:It isn't entitlement mentality. Some of us care about the quality of the hunt, not just the quantity of hunters. Blind laws protect the quality of the hunt from the numerous jackrabbits that are taking up duck hunting (thanks Duck Dynasty). Unfortunatly DGIF and "the industry" have convinced people we need to "grow the sport" by signing up as many nimrods as we can. That is good for them, they get more dollaros. You get a crappier hunt experience.
Someone set up 30 yards away from your spread = not thier problem
Some jackrabbit skybusting at birds workin your decoys = not thier problem
Dingbatter running through your decoys at sunrise = not thier problem
Bag limits down to two a day = not thier problem
License sales down = problem
"The industry" not turning a quick buck selling Chinese crap to hoards of "hunters" = problem
They aren't making any more marsh or public water so the only way to provide a place for these new "hunters" is to try and take away what someone else has. For those of us that aren't rich enough to own our own impoundments our blinds are what we have. Don't blame us for wanting to keep them from this thinly veiled "wealth redistribution" scheme we can see coming.
Stop putting out bad information, They have never taken anyone's blind. They have only enforced the same rules that have been in place for a while and if you don't follow the rules you lose it. The responsibility falls on you the blind owner for losing your blind, not the DGIF. They aren't giving them away to so called "outsiders" either. Your point is that you do not want anyone else hunting down there period. The less people the better. I don't blame you, I agree, it makes for better hunting if birds show up. Spouting off and blaming the DGIF and redistribution of wealth is ridiculous.
I said "try to take the blinds" You need to read my friend. And I do think that is the end game.
I think you miss my point. DGIF's blind policy in BB has been as confused as Obama's foreign policy and I think I have every right to call it out as such. Question is why did DGIF feel the need to change something that had worked for decades? IMO When they make policy decisions they are primarily guided by what will bring in more money to DGIF and appease the vocal nubie.
You know, someone who wakes up one day and decides to become a “duck hunter” just like his favorite TV show but then discovers the reality that there is very little open huntable space in the communistwealth. It isn’t like the Robertson’s private property?!?! Gota call the state and get them to do something about that!
When the changes in BB occurred DGIF stated that they were “going to enforce BB like the rest of the state”, which it has never been, to “open up hunting opportunities”. The result has been to limit hunting opportunity in BB and conflict. What they have done hasn’t been good for anybody. That is my opinion; like it or not.
You ain't right.......kinda touched in the head.