Originally Posted by smokepole
You're right it's a fair question. I don't pretend to have the answer to it, all I did was ask you what your basis is for concluding that no game management happens on public land, which is also a fair question. And apparently a question you can't answer.

And you do know that population surveys are conducted from the air as well as on the ground, right?

My smart-ass comment is the result of reading a bunch of non-residents complaining about fees to hunt in other states. The common thread seems to be an attitude of entitlement, that you're entitled to pay a fee that you find acceptable. I never think of it that way, I look at the fees that other states charge and make a decision. If I don't like their fee structure I don't hunt there. Because as a non-resident I understand that I have no say in how other states conduct their business.

And I damn sure know that I'm not entitled to demand an accounting from state agencies in states I don't reside in. So take your "liberal" bullsh** and stuff it.


Wrong again, if I have to spend more than $700. for a tag, resident or not I would think it would be reasonable to know what I am paying for. That would include some idea of what the state puts into game management for some understanding why the tag costs what it does. It seems you are some kind of troll actually so why would you argue against them putting out some evidence they do what they say we are paying for.

Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]